^^y  Of  p^^m^ 


^OtOGlCKl  ii> 


BR  67  .C78  1893  v. 2 
Cruttwell,  Charles  Thomas, 

1847-1911. 
A  literary  history  of  early 


A   LITERARY 
HISTORY  OF  EARLY   CHRISTIANITY. 


A  LITERARY  HISTORY 


OF 


EARLY    CHRISTIANITY 

INCLUDING  THE 

FATHERS  AND  THE  CHIEF  HERETICAL   WRITERS 
OF  THE  ANTE-NICENE  PERIOD. 

3fot  tbe  XDlse  of  Students  anb  (Beneral  1Rea&ers. 


BY 

CHARLES  THOMAS  CRUTTWELL,  M.A. 

RECTOR  OF  KIBWORTH,   LEICESTER,  AND  RURAL  DEAN  ;  FORMERLY  FELLOW  OF  MERTON 
COLLEGE,  OXFORD. 

AUTHOR  OP   "A  HISTORY  OF  ROMAN  LITERATURE,"  ETC. 


5n  ^wo  IDolumes. 

VOL.  II. 


LONDON: 
CHARLES  GRIFFIN  AND  COMPANY,  Limited^ 

EXETER  STREET,  STRAND. 

1893. 
{All  rights  reserved.] 


CHAPTEE  V. 

JUSTIN  MARTYR  (a.d.   no? -164?). 

Few,  if  any,  of  the  apologists  are  so  well  known  as  Justin, 
and  few,  if  any,  deserve  their  reputation  better.  He  is  not, 
indeed,  a  great  man,  and  he  can  scarcely  l)e  called  a  great 
writer ;  but  he  is  a  man  of  transparent  frankness  and  sin- 
cerity, and  a  writer  whose  sole  aim  is  to  explain  and  defend 
the  truth.  What  he  lacks  in  depth  of  tliought  he  makes  up 
by  breadth  of  sympathy.  If  his  rhetorical  skill  is  imperfect, 
he  is  persuasive  from  his  simple  earnestness.  In  his  youth 
he  had  been  devoted  to  philosophy,  and  after  his  conversion 
he  saw  no  cause  either  to  forego  the  pursuit  or  to  abandon 
its  distinctive  dress.  To  the  last  he  calls  himself  Justin  the 
Philosopher,  a  title  which  the  Church  has  superseded  Ijy  the 
more  glorious  one  of  Justin  the  Martyr.  The  key  to  his 
mind  is  its  thirst  for  intellectual  satisfaction.  He  is  no 
original  genius  who  can  think  out  a  system  for  himself ;  no 
bold  critic  who,  while  accepting  a  system,  can  see  through 
its  weak  points ;  but  he  is  pre-eminently  the  fair-minded 
student,  the  man  of  large  culture,  to  whom  the  philosophic 
presentment  of  truth  is  so  necessary  that  he  cannot  rest 
until  he  finds  it.  And  so  to  him  the  Christian  revelation 
comes  in  the  guise  of  the  true  philosophy.  He  is  not 
blind  to  its  other  aspects,  but  this  is  the  one  that  holds 
him.  And  it  is  to  the  quiet  but  unflinching  persistency  with 
which  he  puts  it  forward  that  the  effect  of  his  writings  upon 
the  Church  is  mainly  due. 

We  shall  include  in  our  notice  of  him  a  brief  account  of 
his  life  and  works,  and  then  endeavour  to  estimate  his  posi- 
tion in  Christian  literature. 

Justin  was  the  son  of  Prisons,  and  grandson  of  Bacchius, 


3i8  THE  A rO LOCUSTS. 

and  wa.s  hum  at  I'lavia  Ncapolis  in  Samaria.  Ho  calls  liini- 
sflf  a  Samaritan,  hut  this  must  not  he  understood  to  imply 
that  he  Wiis  of  Semitic  hlood.  Undoubtedly  he  was  by 
(.'xtrac'tinn  a  Cicntile,  inobahly  a  Greek,  certainly  ignorant  of 
Hebrew,  uncircumcised,  and  brought  up  in  heathen  customs. 
The  exact  date  of  his  birth  is  uncertain.  He  speaks  of 
himself  in  the  Apology  as  writing  150  years  after  Christ, 
but  this  is  possibly  a  round  number.  Tradition  places  his 
martyrdom  under  the  i)refecture  of  Eusticus,  which  began 
A.D.  163,  and  speaks  of  him  as  Ijcing  then  in  the  full  vigour 
of  his  age.  If  we  accept  the  tradition,  his  birth  may  be 
placed  somewhere  about  1 10  a.d. 

Like  most  of  the  Fathers,  Justin  is  far  more  precise  with 
regard  to  liis  spiritual  history  than  with  regard  to  the  history 
of  his  outward  life.  In  the  dialogue  with  Trypho  he  gives 
an  interesting  account  of  the  efforts  he  made  in  his  search 
for  the  true  wisdom. 

In  those  days,  as  now,  the  current  philosophy  was  mate- 
rialistic. But  in  those  days,  as  now,  the  more  earnest  spirits 
could  find  no  rest  in  any  teaching  which  stopped  short  of 
(Jod.  From  the  first  dawn  of  his  philosophic  enthusiasm, 
Justin  assures  us  that  his  main  object  was  to  learn  about 
(lod.  Full  of  hope,  he  attached  himself  to  a  Stoic  teacher, 
and  icccived  instruction  in  the  triple  course  of  physics,  logic, 
and  elliics.  iUit  when  he  ventured  to  ask  for  information 
on  the  Divine  Nature,  he  was  told,  as  men  are  told  now,  that 
in  the  realm  of  physical  causation  there  is  no  room  for  God ; 
that  the  Divine  lies  outside  the  sphere  of  scientific  know- 
ledge. Disappointed,  but  not  discouraged,  he  turned  next 
to  the  Peripatetic  or  Aristotelian  school,  but  here  he  wtis 
confronted  witli  a  spirit  of  worldly  ])rudcnce  which  showed 
more  anxiety  to  secure  a  paying  iiujtil  than  to  impart  tlic 
gift  of  knowledge.  The  i(K'a  of  making  profit  out  of  the 
dilliculties  of  an  inquirer  was  repugnant  to  all  the  nobler 
spirits  of  anti(piity.  The  great  truths  of  philosophy  were 
h(dd  to  be  profaned  by  a  bargain  as  to  tluir  money  value. 
The  generous  spirit  of  the  early  philosoi.hcrs,  who  had  freely 
comnmnicated   their  thoughts,  was  not   yet  (juite   extinct. 


JUSTIN.  319 

Justin  decided  to  have  no  more  to  do  with  tliis  unworthy 
professor,  and  left  him  for  a  Pythagorean  of  great  reputation, 
to  whom  he  expressed  the  longings  of  his  heart.  This  teacher, 
who  appears  to  have  been  an  honest  man,  insisted  on  the 
necessity  of  a  long  course  of  mathematical  and  astronomical 
study  as  an  indispensable  preliminary  for  the  still  more 
abstract  realm  of  theology.  Justin  was  in  perplexity.  He 
knew  little  or  nothing  of  these  studies,  and  shrunk  from  the 
long  delay  of  acquiring  them.  He  desired  to  learn  about 
God,  and  he  was  told  that  he  must  learn  geometry  first. 
He  respected  his  teacher,  he  realised  his  own  ignorance,  but 
it  was  a  true  instinct  that  prompted  him  to  turn  from  these 
dry  bones.  "  The  world  by  wisdom  knew  not  God."  If  God 
is  to  be  known  only  as  the  most  abstract  of  all  abstractions, 
He  is  virtually  not  to  be  known  at  all.  So  now  with  a  heavy 
heart  the  young  inquirer  once  more  turned  away  and  sought 
his  last  Pagan  guide.  This  was  a  Platonist,  who  appears  to 
have  entered  more  or  less  successfully  into  his  mind,  and  to 
have  inspired  him  with  fresh  hopes  of  attaining  his  object. 
The  Church  has  always  confessed  to  a  tenderness  for  Plato ; 
there  is  in  him  a  true  affinity  with  many  of  her  doctrines. 
It  was  not  by  chance  that  Justin  was  led  direct  from  Plato 
to  Christ. 

One  day  as  he  wandered  by  the  seashore  rapt  in  medita- 
tion, he  was  accosted  by  an  aged  man  of  pleasant  mien,  who 
drew  him  into  conversation,  and  discussed  the  question 
whether  philosophy  can  really  solve  the  problems  of  life,  or 
give  certainty  to  the  doubting  soul.  Justin  is  too  honest  to 
say  yes,  but  he  asks,  "  If  philosophy  fails  us,  to  whom  shall 
we  turn  ? "  And  then  the  old  man  explained  to  him  that 
there  have  been  men  to  whom  God  Himself  communicated 
the  truth — holy  men,  friends  of  God,  prophets,  to  whom  His 
Spirit  came  and  filled  them  with  a  wisdom  above  their  own, 
and  that  their  words  have  been  preserved  through  long  ages 
for  the  guidance  of  mankind,  treasured  up  hitherto  in  secret, 
but  recently,  in  the  fulness  of  time,  manifested  to  all  men  by 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  Himself  the  greatest  of  the  prophets,  and 
the  Son  of  the  Most  High.     And  he  bade  the  young  man 


320  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

lit'L  up  his  soul  in  i»iii}er,  "  that  the  gates  of  Light  may 
be  opened  to  thee  also ;  for  these  things  can  only  Ije  seen 
and  known  l)y  those  to  whom  God  and  His  Christ  have 
given  understanding." 

This  interview  formed  the  turning-point  of  Justin's  life. 
He  never  siiw  the  old  man  again,  but  those  stirring  words 
Siink  deep  into  his  soul.  He  pondered  over  them,  and  became 
convinced  that  in  the  revelation  given  by  Christ  and  the 
friends  of  Ciuist  lay  the  true  Divine  philosophy.  From 
henceforth  he  was  a  Christian.  But,  be  it  noticed,  he  did  not 
break  with  philosophy.  His  spiritual  progress  presents  a 
continuous  movement.  He  never  looked  upon  philosophy  as 
the  enemy  or  the  counterfeit  of  the  Gospel.  To  him  it  had 
been  the  handmaid  of  truth.  To  him  the  Christian  system 
crowns  and  glorifies  but  does  not  destroy  its  predecessors. 

As  soon  as  he  was  baptized,  he  appears  to  have  devoted 
his  life  to  a  public  defence  of  the  faith,  not  seeking  contro- 
versy, but,  in  accordance  with  his  philosopher's  garb,  holding 
himself  ready  for  discussion  with  every  comer.  We  hear  of 
him  at  Epliesus  and  at  Eome,  where  he  resided  some  yeai-s. 

The  daily  presence  of  a  Christian  apologist  in  these  great 
centres  must  have  attracted  public  attention.  We  cannot 
wonder  if  Justin  made  enemies.  Of  these  the  most  bitter 
was  one  Crescens,  a  cynic,  whom  Justin  had  publicly  con- 
victed of  ignorance  of  the  principles  of  those  he  attacked, 
and  from  whose  resentment  he  justly  expected  to  suffer. 
On  the  otlier  hand,  as  we  learn  from  his  Dialogue,  he  met 
occasionally  with  friendly  disputants,  who  delmted  without 
bigotry  their  points  of  difference.  The  Jew  Trypho,  who  is 
there  introduced,  is  a  remarkable  instance  of  this.  He  is  as 
unlike  the  average  of  his  countrymen  as  can  be  conceived. 
Uiilin'judieed,  courteous,  willing  to  hear  and  appreciate 
Mrgunicnts  that  make  against  himself,  he  seems  a  model  con- 
trovei-sialist.  He  has  one  defect,  however,  which  neutmlises 
the.se  advantages.  For  though  a  scrupulous  ol)server  of  tlie 
ceremonial  law,  he  is  evidently  a  sceptic  at  heart.  The 
earnestness  of  Justin  is  t  h  r. . wn  jiway  upon  him.  He  admires, 
but  does  not  ])elieve.     He  is  a  type  of  that  class  of  enlightened 


JUSTIN.  321 

Hellenists  of  whom  Philo  is  the  highest  product,  who  estab- 
lished a  modus  vivendi  with  heathen  culture  ;  they  were 
far  more  agreeable  companions  than  the  Palestinian  bigots 
to  whom  Christianity  was  an  abomination,  but  they  were 
almost  equally  unpromising  subjects  for  conversion. 

Of  the  remainder  of  S.  Justin's  life  we  have  no  certain 
information.  We  know  that  he  taught  a  second  time  at 
Eome,  and  was  able,  while  he  lived,  to  hold  the  fiery  spirit 
of  Tatian  in  subjection  to  the  true  faith.  A  few  other  names 
are  mentioned  in  connection  with  him,  but  none  of  any  note 
in  the  Church.  Though  he  did  not  seek  martyrdom,  he  was 
fully  prepared  for  it.  He  was  by  nature  not  insensible  to 
the  evidential  value  of  a  noble  death.  He  cites  with  admira- 
tion the  death  of  Socrates  and  other  great  heathens  as  valid 
testimony  to  the  innocence  of  their  lives ;  and  he  tells  us 
how,  while  yet  a  heathen  himself,  he  was  deeply  moved  by 
the  constancy  of  the  Christians  under  torture  and  death,  and 
how  on  that  evidence  alone  he  had  refused  belief  to  the 
calumnies  spread  against  them.  And  in  the  Divine  provi- 
dence he  was  called  to  give  the  same  evidence  himself,  we 
may  hope  with  similar  blessed  results.  Whether  on  the 
information  of  Crescens,  as  he  expected,  or  of  some  one  else^ 
we  know  not,  he  was  summoned  before  the  tribunal  of  Rus- 
ticus,  and  after  a  brief  examination  of  his  faith,  was  scourged 
and  beheaded  (164-166  ?  A.D.).  The  Acts  of  his  martyrdom 
may  possibly  be  authentic.  They  contain,  at  any  rate,  little 
which  we  need  find  it  difficult  to  accept.  The  Church  has 
not  grudged  her  highest  honour  to  this  calm  and  beautiful 
spirit.  Justin  ranks  both  in  the  "  noble  army  of  martyrs  " 
and  in  the  "  bright  muster-roll  of  saints."  We  have  na 
reason  to  suppose  he  ever  entered  the  priesthood.  As  an 
itinerant  lay-evangelist,  whose  commission  came  straight 
from  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  accomplished  a  work  for  Christianity 
not  only  greater  than  any  of  his  contemporaries,  but  one  that 
has  endured  in  all  its  essential  vitality  to  our  day,  and  will 
endure  so  long  as  men  appreciate  simplicity,  earnestness  and 
honesty  of  heart. 

The  writings  that  have  come  down  to  us  under  the  name 


3-^ 


THK  APOLOGISTS. 


of  Justin  are  sulliciently  numerous.  I>ut  criticism  pro- 
nounces tlircc  alone  to  be  ^'enuinc,  viz.,  the  two  Apologies 
and  the  Dialogue  with  Tryj 


)no. 


Eusebius  informs  us  that  he  was  a  voluminous  writer. 
And  we  should  infer  the  same  from  his  extant  books.  Their 
style  is  dilluse  and  unsystematic,  and  reference  is  made  in 
them  to  other  important  works  which  have  now  perished, 
especially  to  a  Treatise  against  all  Heresies  -  and  a  Uook  against 
Marcion.^  liesides  these  he  wrote  an  Essay  on  Psychology/ 
an  Oration  to  the  Greeks,^  an  Exhortation,'"'  an  Essay  on  the 
I'nity  of  the  Divine  Essence/  and  some  others;  treatises 
under  these  names  have  in  several  cases  come  down  to  us, 
but  their  authenticity  is  extremely  doubtful. 

'i'he  three  genuine  works  were  probably  published  in  the 
following  order :  the  first  Apology,  the  second  Apology,  the 
Dialogue.  In  spite  of  all  the  learning  and  ingenuity  that 
has  been  expended  upon  them,  the  dates  of  composition  are 
still  uncertain.  The  tirst  Apology  was  evidently  written 
under  Antoninus.  Eusebius  assigns  it  to  the  fourth  year  of 
that  emperor  (a.D.  141)  ;  but  good  arguments  have  been  ad- 
vanced for  believing  it  to  be  several  years  later,  probably 
about  A. I).  147  or  148.  The  second  Apology  was  certainly 
written  after  the  tirst,  and  under  the  prefecture  of  Urbicus, 
wliich  extended  probably  from  A.D.  145  to  158  or  159. 
\Vithin  these  limits  it  is  sutlicient  to  fix  its  composition. 
The  Dialogue  was  written  not  in  Kome,  but  most  })robably 
at  Ei)hesus,  whither  it  is  possible  that  Justin  retired  as  a 
matter  of  prudence  after  the  jiublication  of  the  second 
Ajtology.  It  is  the  longest  and  most  elal»orate  of  his  writings, 
l>ut  has  not  the  freshness  and  vigour  of  the  iirst  Apology. 

'  Amorij^  .spurious  and  doubtful  writings  wc  possess  (a)  a  \6r^oi  irpos 
K\X»;i'ai  ;  {h)  a  \6yoi  vapaivtriKbi  irpbs''K\\r]i>as  ;  (c)  a  book  Ttpl  Mofapx'os— 
these  arc  doubtful.  The  following  are  .spurious :  dyarpoinj  So^fxdrwv  tipup 
' ApurroT<\iKu)i'  ;  'AwoKplatu  wpds  ^OpOodd^ov^  ;  'Ex^effij  rrji  opOTJs  irlarfws ;  and 
the  Letter  to  Zcnas  and  bcrcnus.  The  Letter  to  Diognetus  was  long 
attributc<l  to  him. 

'•'  ffvyrayfia  kotA  waauv  alpictuv.  ^  irpbs  "MapKitova.  *  trtpl  ^I'XV^- 

'  \6yoi  ■wpbt''K\\rjt>ai.  ••   \&yos  wapaivfTiKbi  irpbs'EWrjvas. 

'  rtpl  fiovapxiai. 


JUSTIN.  323 

First  Apolog'y. — This  celebrated  work,  which  is  uii- 
donbtedly  one  of  the  three  or  four  most  important  remains 
of  early  Church  literature,  commences  thus : — 

''To  the  Emperor  Titus  Aelius  Hadrianus  Antoninus  Pius 
Augustus  Caesar  and  to  Verissimus  his  son  the  philosopher,  and 
to  Lucius  the  philosopher,  Caesar's  son  by  nature  and  of  Pius  by 
adoption,  a  lover  of  learning,  and  to  the  sacred  Senate  and  whole 
people  of  Rome;  on  behalf  of  those  who  are  unjustly  hated  and 
reviled  by  every  class  of  men,  I  Justin,  the  son  of  Prisons  and 
grandson  of  Bacchius,  of  Flavia  Neapolis  in  Palestine,  being  myself 
one  of  them,  have  composed  this  address  and  intercession." 

There  is  something  very  effective  in  this  enumeration  of 
august  titles,  each  of  which,  it  is  half  implied,  ought  to  act 
as  a  spur  to  him  who  owns  it  to  prove  himself  in  truth  what 
he  is  in  name,  the  Pious,  the  Most  True,  the  Philosopher. 
Justin  appeals  with  confidence  to  the  Emperor  and  princes, 
as  men  who  intend  to  govern  well,  not  to  condemn  his  co- 
religionists unheard.  The  Christian  Platonist  rejoiced  that 
the  time  had  come  for  which  his  old  master  had  sighed, 
when  kings  should  be  philosophers  and  should  rule  accord- 
ingly, and  like  Plato  he  augured  well  for  the  lot  of  the  right- 
eous in  such  a  time.  So  he  challenges  an  impartial  inquiry 
into  the  character  of  the  Christians  accused,  protesting 
strongly  against  the  unjust  condemnation  of  the  name  alone. 

He  points  out  the  true  manner  of  life  among  the  faithful, 
shows  how  superficial  are  the  charges  of  atheism,  of  immo- 
rality, of  revolutionary  designs;  and  vindicates  the  claim 
of  the  Christians  to  be  considered  loyal,  obedient  subjects. 

He  defends  the  worship  of  Christ,  incomprehensible  as  it 
appears  to  the  heathen,  on  grounds  which  they  ought  to 
understand.  He  instances  the  divine  truth  of  His  teaching, 
the  conformity  of  many  of  His  doctrines  with  human  reason, 
e.g.,  the  future  judgment,  the  Divine  Sonship,  the  end  of  the 
world ;  even  His  miracles  (he  says)  can  be  illustrated  from 
profane  experience,  though  we  must  carefully  guard  them 
against  the  charge  of  magic  so  often  brought  by  unl)elievers. 
The  evidence  of  prophecy  is  enough  to  disprove  this  charge. 


324  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

KiiKT  propliecy  sketches  out  with  no  uncertain  \h'u  all  the 
main  features  in  tlu'  ])ast  history  of  Christ,  and  thus  gives 
us  confidence  that  its  future  fulfilment  will  equally  be  made 
good.  Justin  strongly  urges  the  antiquity  of  the  Jewish 
writings,  for  this  was  an  argument  to  whicli  the  Iiomans 
always  gave  weight. 

The  conchiding  chapters  contain  an  account  (all  too  short, 
unfortunately)  of  the  practice  of  Christian  rites  and  the 
method  of  worship.  It  is  the  locus  classicus  in  all  C(jntro- 
versies  as  to  early  Church  ceremonial,  and,  taken  with  the 
Apostolic  Tcachinrj,  proves  how  little  of  ritual  existed,  or,  to 
spciik  more  accurately,  liow  little  questions  of  ritual  were 
thought  of  in  the  services  of  the  primitive  Church.  The 
well-known  passage  about  the  Eucharist  is  familiar  to  many, 
but  the  reader  may  like  to  have  it  inserted  here. 

Justin's  Account  of  the  Eucharist. 

"  After  we  have  thus  washed  him  who  has  believed  and 
assented  to  our  doctrine,  we  lead  him  to  those  whom  we  call 
the  brethren,  where  they  are  met  together  to  offer  earnest 
])rayors  at  once  for  themselves  and  the  newly  enlightened,  and 
for  all  men  everywhere,  that,  liaving  learned  the  truth,  we  may 
he  counted  worthy  to  be  found  practisers  of  good  works  and 
keepers  of  the  commandments,  that  we  may  obtain  eternal 
salvation. 

"  Our  prayer  ended,  we  greet  one  another  witli  a  kiss.  Then 
laead  is  Ijiou^^ht  to  the  president  among  the  l)rethren,  and  a  cup 
of  wine  and  water  mingled,  and  he,  receiving  it,  utters  praise 
and  gloiy  to  the  Father  of  all  through  the  name  of  the  Son  and 
Holy  Spirit,  and  ofTers  thanks  at  some  length  for  these  merciful 
fjifts.  And  when  the  prayer  and  thanksgiving  are  ended,  the 
whole  people  present  assent  to  them  by  answering,  Amen.  Tliis 
done,  the  deacons  give  to  each  of  those  present  some  of  the  bread 
and  wine  and  water,  over  which  thanks  have  been  given,  to 
partak<»  thereof,  and  some  they  carry  away  for  the  absent. 

"  And  this  nourishment  we  call  the  Kucharist,  and  none  are 
allowed  to  part^ike  of  it  but  such  as  believe  our  doctrines  to  1)0 
tnie,  and  have  l)een  washed  in  the  laver  of  remission  of  sins  and 
regenemtion,  and  live  in  the  manner  that  Christ  handed  down. 
For  we  do  not  receive  it  as  eommon  hread  or  common  drink  : 


JUSTIN.  325 

but  just  as  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour  became  flesh  through  the 
Word  of  God,  and  took  flesh  and  blood  for  our  salvation,  even 
so  we  have  been  taught  that  the  food  blessed  by  the  word  of 
prayer  from  Him,  by  which  through  physical  change  our  own 
flesh  and  blood  is  nourished,  is  both  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the 
same  Incarnate  Jesus.  For  the  Apostles  in  the  Memoirs  written 
by  them,  which  are  called  Gospels,  have  handed  down  that  so  it 
was  commanded  them  :  that  Jesus  took  bread,  and  when  He  had 
given  thanks  He  said,  '  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  Me.  This  is 
My  Body.'  And  in  the  same  way  He  took  the  cup,  and  when 
He  had  given  thanks  He  said,  '  This  is  My  Blood,'  and  gave  it 
to  them  alone. 

"  Now  the  evil  demons  have  copied  this  in  the  mysteries  of 
Mithras  which  they  have  delivered  :  for  you  know  or  may  know 
that  bread  and  a  cup  of  water  are  set  among  the  ceremonies  of 
initiation,  together  with  certain  forms  of  words. 

"  When  the  service  is  over,  we  continually  remind  one  an- 
other of  what  we  have  done,  and  those  of  us  who  are  well-to- 
do  give  help  to  those  who  are  in  need,  and  we  always  remain 
together.  And  for  all  that  we  partake  of  we  bless  the  ^laker  of 
all  through  His  Son  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  on 
the  day  called  Sunday  there  is  a  meeting  of  all  who  live  in  the 
cities  or  country,  and  the  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles  or  the  writings 
of  the  Prophets  are  read,  so  far  as  time  permits.  When  the 
reader  has  finished,  the  president  addresses  words  of  admonition, 
and  exhorts  us  to  imitate  the  good  things  we  have  heard.  Then 
we  all  stand  up  together  and  utter  prayers.  And,  as  I  said 
before,  the  prayer  ended,  bread  and  wine  and  water  are  brought 
in,  and  the  president  utters  prayers  and  thanksgivings  according 
to  his  ability,  and  the  people  assent  by  saying  Amen,  and  the 
distribution  and  participation  of  the  consecrated  elements  follows, 
and  a  portion  of  them  is  taken  by  the  deacons  to  those  who  are 
absent.  And  those  who  are  wealthy  and  willing,  each  according 
to  his  intention  gives  what  he  thinks  fit,  and  the  sum  collected 
is  laid  up  with  the  president,  who  assists  the  widows  and  orphans, 
and  those  who  from  sickness  or  any  other  cause  are  in  need,  and 
those  who  are  in  prison,  and  the  strangers  who  sojourn  among 
us,  and,  in  a  word,  he  cares  for  all  who  are  in  want." 

No  one  who  reads  the  above  passage  can  fail  to  be  im- 
pressed v^ith  its  simplicity  and  candour,  as  well  as  with  its 
immense  importance  as  an  authority  on  liturgical  practice. 


T,2G  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

Whether  Justin's  appeal  ever  found  its  way  into  the  Emperor's 
hands  we  know  not.  It  is  hardly  likely  that  a  ruler  so  con- 
scientious as  Antoninus  could  brush  aside  as  of  no  account  a 
statement  couched  in  language  so  moderate  and  dealing  so 
frankly  with  the  point  at  issue  ;  and  yet  we  cannot  tell.  There 
is  deep  j^ithos  in  the  concluding  words,  "  If  my  statement 
appears  to  you  reasonable  and  truthful,  have  regard  to  it ; 
if  it  seems  absurd,  despise  it  as  an  absurdity,  but  do  not 
condemn  to  death  as  enemies  those  who  are  doing  no  wrong." 
If  Antoninus  read  those  words,  and  they  made  no  impression 
upon  his  mind,  we  may  form  some  estimate  of  the  weight  of 
prejudice,  accumulated  through  centuries  of  national  pride  and 
one-sided  discipline,  which  made  even  the  purest  and  noblest 
of  the  IJomans  inaccessible  to  the  Christian  argument — 

"  Xec  luagis  incepto  viiltiuu  seriuoiie  movetur 
Qiuim  si  dura  .silex  aut  stet  Marpesia  cautes." 

The  Second  Apolog'y  is  much  shorter  than  the  first,  and 
less  carefully  composed.  It  is  rather  an  occasional  pamphlet 
drawn  forth  l.>y  a  miscarriage  of  justice  than  a  systematic 
treatise.  The  indignation  of  Justin  was  aroused  by  the  con- 
(hict  of  Lollius  Urbicus,  the  distinguished  soldier  who  at  this 
time  ^hcld  the  prefecture  of  the  city,  in  the  case  of  some 
Christians  whom  he  had  caused  to  be  put  to  death  without 
trial.  It  ap])ears  that  a  lioman  lady  who  was  married  to  a 
dis.solute  husband,  and  had  herself  led  a  dissolute  life,  was 
converted  to  Christianity ;  after  which,  finding  her  husband's 
comhict  intolerable  to  lier,  and  failing  to  induce  him  to 
amend  it,  slie  meditated  a  separation.  Her  friends  per- 
sua<le(l  her  to  bear  with  him  a  while  longer,  but  at  last 
his  excesses  became  so  flagrant  that  she  was  oltliged  to  take 
advantage  of  tlie  law.  Ilcr  husband  betrayed  her  to  the 
authorities,  from  whom,  hnutver,  she  obtained  a  respite  on 
the  ]»lea  of  disposing  of  her  [iroiterty.  Determined  on  re- 
venge, he  inchiced  a  centurion,  a  friend  of  liis,  to  accust*  one 
Ptolemieus,  by  whose  instrumentality  she  had  brcii  con- 
verted, before  the  prefect  as  a  Christian.  Urbicus  allowed 
him  to  languisli  .some  months  in  prison  ;  he  then  cited  him 


JUSTIN.  327 

to  appear,  and  on  hearing  his  confession  at  once  condemned 
him  to  death  ;  a  proceeding  which  so  aroused  the  wrath  of 
a  man  named  Lucius,  who  was  present  at  the  court,  that  he 
pubHcly  arraigned  the  prefect  of  injustice.  Urbicus  con- 
tented himself  with  replying,  "  It  seems,  then,  that  you  too 
are  a  Christian."  And  on  Lucius  confessing  that  he  was, 
he  also  was  ])ronounced  guilty,  and  led  away  to  death. 

Justin  addresses  his  protest  to  the  Senate  and  incidentally 
to  the  Emperor,  and  shrinks  not  from  reproaching  Urbicus 
liimself  as  a  betrayer  of  justice.  He  is  not  insensible  of  the 
danger  he  incurs  by  his  plain  speaking.  He  confidently 
expects  that,  either  by  the  action  of  the  authorities  or 
through  the  machinations  of  Crescens  his  personal  enemy, 
lie  will  himself  share  the  fate  of  those  he  champions.  But 
he  implores  the  Emperor,  before  deciding  against  him,  to 
hear  his  arguments,  if  he  has  not  read  them  already,  and  to 
judge  between  him  and  his  accusers. 

He  then  passes  from  the  personal  question  to  more  general 
grounds  of  complaint.  He  deals  with  the  argument  so  often 
advanced  that  the  Christians,  if  so  anxious  for  death,  can 
save  the  magistrates  the  trouble  of  condemning  them  by 
suicide.  "  Wretched  men  ! "  it  had  been  said  on  one  occasion, 
"  are  there  no  halters,  no  rocks,  no  deep  waters  of  the  sea, 
by  which  you  can  put  an  end  to  the  existence  you  loathe, 
and  seek  for  yourselves  the  God  you  are  so  anxious  to  meet  ?  " 
To  this  taunt  Justin  answers  that  to  act  thus  would  be  to 
interfere  with  the  Divine  plan,  which  provides  for  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  race.  "  You  mistake,"  he  says,  "  we  do  not 
wish  to  die ;  but  we  are  resolved  to  confess  the  truth,  even 
though  we  know  it  will  slay  us." 

Another  argument  brought  by  the  heathen  was  the  fol- 
lowing :  "  If  you  were  in  truth  the  favourites  of  Heaven, 
your  God  would  surely  interfere  to  protect  His  votaries." 
Justin's  reply  to  this  is  very  peculiar.  He  declares  that 
God  at  first  entrusted  mankind  to  the  guardianship  of  angels, 
some  of  whom,  by  their  intercourse  with  women,  betrayed 
their  trust,  and  have  thrown  the  course  of  human  progress 
into  confusion.     This  necessitates  the  Christian  dispensation 


328  TIIK  Al'OLO(;iSTS. 

of  redemption,  and  the  survival  of  the  holy  seed  upon  the 
eiirth  to  maintain  the  strife  against  the  demons,  and  to  delay 
the  final  catastrophe.  He  connects  this  view  with  his  re- 
markable theory  of  the  Logos,  which  in  various  partial  and 
imperfect  manifestati(jns  has  kept  alive,  through  all  human 
history,  the  true  ideal  of  righteousness.  We  shall  reserve 
our  criticism  of  this  theory  to  a  later  part  of  the  chapter. 
It  is  the  main  contribution  of  this  Apology  to  the  body  of 
Christian  thought. 

The  Dialogrue  with  Trypho  the  Jew. — This  is  a  far 
longer  and  more  elaljorate  treatise  than  either  of  the  Apo- 
logies, and  contains,  more  or  less  fully  drawn  out,  all  the 
leading  points  of  Christian  divinity.  In  form  it  is  modelled 
on  the  Dialogues  of  Plato;  l)ut,  with  the  exception  of  the 
opening  scene,  there  is  nothing  dramatic  about  it.  Substan- 
tially, it  is  a  defence  of  the  Christian  interpretation  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  of  Christianity  as  the  successor  and 
supplanter  of  Judaism.  It  is  conducted  tliroughout  on  the 
principles  of  calm  reasoning,  and  forms  a  highly  favourable 
example  of  a  controversial  treatise.  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  it  embodies  with  tolerable  accuracy  the  incidents 
of  a  real  discussion,  wliich  Justin  tells  us  occupied  two  days. 
Tlie  position  of  Tryplio  is  this.  He  admits  the  high  moral 
and  spiritual  level  of  Christianity,  and  only  fears  that  it  is 
too  high  for  practice.  He  also  admits  that  the  Deity,  whom 
genuine  Cliristians  acknowledge,  is  the  One  God  revealed  in 
the  Old  Testament,  the  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth.  On 
this  ground  he  is  at  one  with  Justin,  and  willing  to  ai-gue 
with  him.  He  then  advances  liis  objections.  These  are 
two.  (Jranting  the  Old  Testament  to  be  a  revelation  of  the 
Divine  Will,  he  asks  (i)  How  can  those  who  believe  in  God 
set  at  nought  His  revealed  I^iw  ?  (2)  How  can  any  man 
believe  in  salvation  l)y  a  human  Saviour? 

These  are,  of  course,  very  real  and  weighty  i)oints.  And 
the  reply  made  by  Justin  rests  entirely  upon  the  authority 
of  Holy  Scrij)ture.  In  meeting  Tryi)ho's  lirst  objection,  he 
had  been  j)reced(*d  ])y  S.  Paul,  who,  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
Eomans  and  Galatians,  had  gone  to  the  root  of  the  question, 


JUSTIN.  329 

and  by  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews,  who  had  supplied  a  dif- 
ferent but  highly  fruitful  argument.  Justin's  treatment 
approximates  more  to  that  of  the  latter  epistle.  He  proves 
the  transitoriness  of  the  Law  by  its  fulfilment  in  Christ, 
who,  by  taking  away  sin,  took  away  the  necessity  for  the 
Law.  For,  to  Justin,  as  to  the  author  of  the  Epistle  of 
Barnabas,  the  Law,  though  Divinely  given,  does  not  reflect 
the  perfection  of  the  Godhead.  It  was  because  of  the  failure 
of  the  Jewish  race  to  apprehend  God  that  the  Law  was 
granted ;  and  its  precepts,  he  h  eld,  w^ere  partly  pedagogic, 
partly  to  be  allegorically  understood.  The  great  Pauline 
doctrine  of  Law  as  a  necessary  moment  in  the  Divine  pur- 
pose of  grace  was  imperfectly  grasped  by  Justin.  The  Law 
was,  in  his  view,  added  rather  as  a  discipline  on  account  of 
sin  already  committed,  than  as  a  stage  in  the  eternal  revela- 
tion of  Divine  Eighteousness. 

It  is,  however,  to  the  second  objection  of  Trypho  that 
Justin  devotes  his  fullest  powers  and  the  greater  portion  of 
the  Dialogue.  He  ranges  over  the  entire  Old  Testament  for 
proofs  of  the  Divine  Nature  of  C  hrist,  and  he  finds  them  not 
in  incidental  allusions  or  mystic  oracles,  but  in  the  most 
conspicuous  and  familiar  narratives  of  the  Divine  appear- 
ance. He  shows  that  these  can  only  be  explained  by  a 
Duality  within  the  Unity  of  the  Godhead ;  and,  Ijy  a  mas- 
terly use  of  history,  prophecy  and  poetical  passages,  he 
establishes  the  co-equal  Sonship  of  Christ.  In  affirming  the 
Incarnation  of  the  Eternal  Son,  Justin  opposes  himself  to 
those  low  views  of  His  Person  which  are  known  as  Ebionite. 
He  does  not,  indeed,  refuse  the  name  of  Christian  to  such  as 
hold  them,  but  he  insists  upon  Christ's  supernatural  birth  as 
vitally  essential  to  the  Incarnation.  His  dogmatic  Chris- 
tology  is  perhaps  defective  ^  in  certain  relations,  and  this  is 
really  inevitable,  seeing  that  he  lived  before  the  Arian  con- 
troversy had  wrung  from  the  Church  a  complete  logical 
enunciation  of  the  metaphysical  problem.  But  it  is  as  idle 
to  charge  Justin  with  imperfect  Catholicity  as  it  is  to  seek 

^  As  where,   from  the  exigencies  of  logic,  he  speaks  of  the  Son  as 


330  TUK  APOLOC.ISTS. 

support  in  his  exaiiiplo  for  not  definin<^  dognia.  His  pliicc 
in  thcolot^y  is  dfterniined  by  his  date  in  the  first  instance, 
and  in  the  second  by  his  natund  bias.  As  Canon  Scott 
Holland  remarks,  "his  faith  was  far  more  pronounced  and 
detinite  than  his  Platonic  logic."  To  whatever  conclusions 
his  logic  may  have  led,  the  whole  temper  of  the  Dialogue 
forbids  us  to  doubt  that  he  would  have  harmonised  them 
with  the  Nicene  exposition  had  it  been  possible  at  that  time 
to  place  it  before  him.  Trypho  confesses  that  Justin's  use 
of  the  Old  Testament  has  cast  a  new  light  upon  it,  and, 
though  unwilling  to  yield,  he  is  at  least  shaken.  Justin 
concludes  his  elaborate  argument  with  an  exposition  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  the  ingathering  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
inevitable  rejection  of  the  circumcision  unless  they  accept 
the  Gospel. 

It  is  obvious  that  in  a  sketch  like  the  present  only  the 
most  general  outline  can  be  ottered  of  these  most  important 
works;  but  enough,  we  hope,  has  l)een  given  to  show  their 
immense  interest  for  all  to  whom  Church  history  hai>  a 
meaning.  And  perliaps,  if  we  were  to  recommend  one  single 
volume  out  of  the  whole  range  of  ecclesiastical  literature  as 
in  the  noblest  sense  representative  of  the  whole,  we  should 
lix,  not,  as  is  usual,  on  Tertullian's  brilliant  declamation,  but 
on  the  more  unpretending  but  sinqJer  ;ind  larger-minde(l 
Apology  of  Justin. 

His  Merits  and  Influence  as  a  Church  Writer. 

From  what  has  been  said,  the  reader  will  ])erceive  that 
Justin  o{'eupi(;s  a  very  original  ])osition  in  Christian  litera- 
ture. He  is  at  once  ])hilosoi»her  and  saint,  a  combination  a.s 
rare  as  it  is  delightful.  In  some  respects  he  may  be  com- 
])ared  with  ()iiL:en,  though  intellectually  far  inferior  t(»  that 
great  thinker;  but  in  the  possession  of  one  gift  tliey  agree, 
and  that  one  of  the  choicest  and  most  beautiful  of  all,  intel- 
lectual sympathy.  It  is  a  question  well  worth  asking,  Why 
sliould  a  strong  conviction  of  dogmatic  truth  close  tlie 
heart  against  the  etVorts  of  minds  dilVerently  constituted  to 


JUSTIN.  331 

penetrate  the  secret  of  humanity  ?  It  cannot  be  denied  that 
this  is  generally  the  case.  The  greatest  theologians  have 
many  intellectual  excellences,  but  among  them  sympathy  with 
those  who  differ  can  be  rarely  reckoned.  Yet  surely  sym- 
pathy is  a  powerful  agent  of  persuasion.  It  seeks  not,  indeed, 
to  dominate  the  intelligence  or  to  coerce  the  judgment,  but 
it  is  the  still  small  voice  that  gains  the  ear  of  the  soul  amid 
all  the  fury  of  the  elements,  and  makes  music  of  life's  jarring 
discord.  It  is  the  glory  of  Justin  the  philosopher  that  he 
saw  this,  and  was  not  afraid  to  express  it ;  it  is  the  glory  of 
Justin  the  saint  and  martyr  that  it  did  not  shake  his  still 
higher  certainty  of  a  divine  revelation  of  truth. 

We  shall  consider  the  two  points  in  Justin's  character 
which  are  most  distinctively  his,  and  which  form  his  main 
legacy  to  the  Christian  world :  first,  his  method  of  defending 
the  faith;  and  second,  his  theory  of  the  evolution  of  the 
Logos  in  humanity. 

His  method  was  strictly  dialectic,  embodying  the  spirit  of 
the  old  Socratics.  If  he  was  not  a  profound  metaphysician,  if 
his  scientific  training  was  far  below  the  proud  requirement, 
/ji7)BeU  ayeco/jbirpTjTo^;  elaiTco  ("  Let  none  ignorant  of  geometry 
enter  here  "),  at  any  rate  his  mental  attitude  was  thoroughly 
Platonic.  He  fully  believed  in  the  efficacy  of  honest  dis- 
cussion as  a  means  of  arriving  at  truth.  His  own  candour 
led  him  to  take  an  optimist  view  of  human  nature.  When 
he  addresses  Caesar,  he  claims  the  right  of  an  equal  to  free 
and  open  debate,  and  he  gives  Csesar  credit  on  his  side  for 
willingness  to  be  convinced.  When  he  disputes  with  Trypho, 
he  lays  down  the  principles  on  whicli  his  argument  will  be 
founded,  and  proposes  to  ask  for  nothing  beyond  what  strict 
reasoning  may  involve.  And  his  antagonist  himself  con- 
fesses that  Justin  has  been  true  to  his  promise.  It  is 
indeed  possible  that  there  was  another  side  to  Justin's  mind. 
We  must  not  forget  that  all  the  treatises  we  possess  are 
addressed  to  opponents.  In  these  it  was  necessary  to  take 
a  ground  common  to  both  sides,  and  to  ignore  the  special 
source  of  Church  authority  from  which  the  doctrines  he 
defended  were  derived.     But,  making;  all  allowance  for  this, 


332  THE  APOLOCHSTS. 

we  may  saMy  asst'it  thai  the  apologetic  attitude  was  the 
most  eonj^enial  tu  Justin's  mind,  that  he  lr>ved  argument 
better  tlian  assertion,  and  convincing  men's  judgment  better 
tlian  overawing  it. 

And  this  is  what  makes  him  specially  valuable  at  the  pre- 
sent time.  The  demand  for  a  reasonable  Christianity  is  not 
merely  a  revolt  against  the  yoke  of  dogma.  It  has  a  deeper 
source  in  the  springs  of  tlie  human  spirit.  A  generation 
whose  mental  habits  are  moulded  by  comparative  science, 
by  evolution,  by  democracy,  is  not  likely  to  acquiesce  in  any 
unreasoned  conclusions  whatsoever.  There  may  be  a  lack  of 
reverence,  but  there  is  no  lack  of  earnestness.  The  science 
of  religion,  by  comparing  together  the  various  religions  of 
mankind,  does  not  mean  to  be,  and  need  not  be,  destructive. 
Justin's  apologetic  method  supplies  as  it  were  a  parable  of 
our  own  controversies.  He  assumes  notliiug  as  incontro- 
vertible except  the  facts  of  history,  or  what  lie  believes  to  be 
such,  and  on  these  he  l)uil(Is  his  argument :  wliile  in  matters 
bcycdid  the  reach  of  Imman  research  he  applies  the  method 
of  analogy. 

It  follows  from  this  fundamental  characteristic  of  Justin's 
mind  that  he  is  also  lil)eral  in  his  judgments.  His  attitude 
towards  Trypho,  towards  the  Judaising  sects,  and  towards 
the  noblest  of  the  heathen,  is  remarkably  indulgent.  Yet 
Justin  could  be  severe  too.  The  taint  of  paganism  in  the 
theories  of  the  (Jnostics  was  abhorrent  to  him.  And  still 
moiv  unsparingly  did  he  denounce  the  ditheism  of  Marcion, 
whom  he  speaks  of  as  the  Church's  most  formidable  foe. 
Tlicn^  is  no  real  inconsistency  in  this  twofold  attitude. 
Wlicre  the  error  lay  in  iiiipcrfcct  a])pn'hension  of  trutli,  he 
was  i'ver  ready  witli  the  sympathy  of  superior  eidightenment. 
l)Ut  where  it  lay  in  the  perversion  of  truth,  either  by  way  of 
iiccommodation  to  heathenism,  or  of  mere  antagonism  to  the 
Jewish  creed,  he  roused  tlie  entire  energy  of  his  nature  in 
stern  antagonism,  and  cared  not  for  the  enmity  he  provoked. 
It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  his  feixrless  courage,  liis  out- 
s])oken  honesty.  To  such  as  him  tlie  crown  of  tlic^  martyr 
c(»mes  as  the  natural,  almost  the  ineviUible,end  of  life's  battle. 


JUSTIN.  333 

A  few  words  must  now  be  said  on  the  subject  of  his  theory 
of  the  Logos.  Into  the  question  whence  he  derived  it,  we 
need  not  enter  at  any  length.  Its  interest  is  theological 
rather  than  literary.  On  the  one  hand,  he  was  doubtless 
familiar  with  the  speculations  of  Philo,  though  he  never 
alludes  to  him  by  name.  On  the  other  hand,  it  has  been 
asked,  if  he  knew  of  S.  John's  Gospel,  how  comes  it  that  he 
does  not  mention  so  pre-eminent  a  tower  of  support  to  his 
own  views  ?  We  cannot  tell.  But  that  he  was  acquainted 
with  the  Johannine  writings  is  not  only  in  itself  likely,  but 
rendered  almost  certain  by  a  passage  in  the  first  Apology 
(ch.  Ixi.).  "  For  Christ  said,  Unless  ye  be  born  again,  ye  shall 
not  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  For  it  is  clear  to  all 
that  those  who  have  once  been  begotten  cannot  enter  a 
second  time  into  their  mothers'  wombs." 

The  conception  of  the  Logos  as  the  Divine  Eeason  imma- 
nent in  humanity,  and  in  due  season  incarnate  in  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  has  been  truly  said  to  combine  the  universalism  of 
Philo  with  the  distinctive  teaching  of  the  beloved  Apostle. 
The  original  element  in  Justin's  theory  is  his  application  of 
S.  John's  great  saying,  "That  was  the  true  light,  which 
lighteth  every  man  coming  into  the  world."  The  way  he 
applies  it  is  as  follows.  He  holds  the  Logos  to  have  been 
originally  manifested  in  humanity  as  a  seed  showing  itself  in 
gradual  development  here  and  there  until  its  full  fructifica- 
tion in  Christ.  He  calls  it  the  ^10709  ^Trep/iariKo^,  which 
may  be  rendered  The  Germinal  Word.  In  a  celebrated  pas- 
sage at  the  close  of  the  second  Apology,  he  says  :  1 — 

"  I  confess  that  I  count  it  glory  to  be  found  a  Christian,  and 
strive  mightily  to  l)e  such ;  not  that  the  Platonic  doctrines  are 
opposed  to  Christ,  but  rather  that  they  are  not  entirely  similar, 
and  so  too  with  the  Stoics,  poets,  and  historians.  For  each  of 
these  spoke  well,  from  the  partial  manifestation  of  the  Spermatic 
Word  beholding  that  which  was  akin  to  it  ;  but  those  who  in 
high  matters  gave  forth  inconsistent  views  appear  not  to  have 
possessed  the  unseen  knowledge  and  the  irrefutal)le  wisdom. 
Whatever  has  been  rightly  spoken  among  all  men  belongs  ito  us 

1  Ch.  xiii. 


334  '"'-  Al'OLOCISTS. 

Christians  :  for  wo  worship  and  love  next  to  God  the  Ix)gos  that  is 
from  tlic  inil)0;,'otten  and  unutterable  Deity,  since  for  us  He  became 
man  that  lie  mi^dit  share  our  sufTeriugs  and  effect  our  cure.^  For 
all  their  writers  have  been  able  dimly  to  discern  the  truth  tlirou^di 
the  implanted  seed  of  the  Logos  within  them.  For  the  seed  of 
a  thing,  or  the  power  of  reproducing  it  is  one  thing :  that  by  the 
favour  of  which  the  communication  and  imitation  of  itself  takes 
j)lace  is  another." 

To  diislin  ihrrclnrc  the  Incarnation  of  the  Logos  in  Christ 
is  the  fultilnient  not  only  of  the  conscious  prophecy  of  the 
(lid  Tcslanicnt,  l)ut  of  the  unconscious  prophecy  of  the  best 
lieathen  thought.  He  is  of  opinion  that  God  spake  by  the 
sages  of  the  ancient  world  as  well  as  through  the  chosen 
race.  Indeed,  every  man  has  ini})lante(l  within  him  a  germ 
of  the  Divine  Word,  and  it  is  l)y  virtue  of  that  germ  that  he 
knows  whatever  he  truly  knows,  and  wills  whatever  he  wills 
ariglit.  And  in  proportion  as  the  wise  men,  poets  and  law- 
<dvers  of  the  heathen  world,  l)oth  knew  more  of  truth  and 
acted  more  powerfully  for  the  good  of  man  than  their  fel- 
lows, so  they  enjoyed  a  larger  measure  of  the  growth  of  the 
Germinal  Word  within  them.  And  this  divinely-manifested 
growth  was  met  among  the  heathen,  as  among  the  dews,  by 
the  bitter  emnity  of  the  unregenerate  human  will.  Hera- 
elitus  and  Socrates  are  signal  instances  (»f  tlie  contlict  which 
all  wise  and  all  righteous  men  have  in  their  measure  been 
obliged  to  wage.  J>ut  the  manifestation  of  the  Word  was  in 
all  tiiese  cases  partial  only.  In  Christ  it  was  complete.  And 
thus  Christians  are  placed  in  a  new  position  with  regard  to 
truth  not  only  as  compared  with  Tagans  but  also  as  com- 
pared with  Jews.  They  can  fearlessly  appropriate  all  thai 
has  ever  been  rightly  said  or  done  as  their  own,  and  can 
tlirow  the  light  of  ])erfect  knowledge  on  the  contradictions 
and  doubts  of  the  ]»ast.  "  Ye  have  an  unction  from  the  Holy 
One,  and  ye  know  all  things."  The  consequences  of  this 
<loctrine  were  to  be  devtdojied  at  a  later  ])eriotl,  in  the  con- 
genial atmosjdiere  of  Alexandria.     But  to  Justin  belongs  the 

'  'Io<rt»',  no  doubt  with  an  allusion  to  the  name  'Itjctow,  which  those  igno- 
rant of   Hebrew  loved  to  connect  with  the  verb  idofxai,  *'  I  heal." 


JUSTIN.  335 

credit  of  having  first  delivered  it.  Its  importance  was  by 
no  means  exhausted  in  the  early  Church.  We  cannot  doubt 
that  a  great  application  of  it  still  lies  before  Christendom, 
and  that  its  powerful  magnetism  will  again  attract  wise  and 
virtuous  heathen  souls  to  Christ. 


Literary  Characteristics. 

A  few  concluding  remarks  may  be  added  on  the  literary 
characteristics  of  this  Father.  These  are  :  familiarity  with  a 
wide  range  of  Hellenic  culture,  a  fondness  for  quotation,  and 
a  plain  unstudied  presentation  of  what  he  has  to  say,  entirely 
free  from  rhetorical  artifice  or  exaggeration. 

His  acquaintance  with  Greek  poetry  and  philosophy  is 
considerable.  His  allusions  to  the  doctrines  of  Plato  and 
the  Stoics  in  particular  are  frequent  and  precise.  He  had 
certainly  read  the  Republic,  and  probably  the  Timseus.  He 
even  imitates  the  form  of  Plato's  works  in  the  introduction 
to  his  Dialogue.  With  regard  to  the  Stoics,  he  approves  of 
their  moral  theories,  but  criticises  unfavourably  their  views 
of  Providence,  fate,  and  free-will.  He  implies  also  that  he 
had  read  a  sufficient  amount  of  Greek  poetry  and  history  to 
entitle  him  to  pronounce  an  opinion  on  their  value. 

His  knowledge  of  the  Old  Testament  is  thorough  and 
first-hand.  His  application  of  prophecy  is  often  traditional, 
but  sometimes  original  and  suggestive.  He  is  rarely  fanciful, 
except  when  engaged  in  proving  the  universal  presence  of 
the  Cross  as  an  emblem  in  Scripture,  nature  and  art.^  Here 
he  allows  the  spurious  gnosis  of  Barnabas  to  carry  him  far 
away  from  his  usual  sober  line  of  argument.  In  this  as  in 
matters  of  greater  value  he  was  a  pioneer,  followed  l)y  a  long 
line  of  successors.  Tliere  is  much  prul)al)ility  that  Tertullian 
studied  Justin's  works,  from  which  he  draws  his  most  effec- 
tive weapon  of  retorting  the  enemy's  charges  upon  himself. 
For  instance,  Justin  points  out  that  the  very  vices  of  which 
the  heathen  world  accuses  the  Christians  are  actually  prac- 
tised among  its  own  religious  rites.     He  does  not  deal  witli 

'  Apol.  i.  chap.  Iv. 


336  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  point  us  a  rhetorician,  l»ul  simply  states  it.  Tertullian 
(Irivos  it  home  with  inexoral)l('  rii^oiir,  and  takes  care  that  it 
shall  leave  its  sting.  Again,  Justin  is  the  first  to  point  out 
the  analogies  l)etween  Christian  doctrines  and  many  heathen 
superstitions  which  in  his  system  admit  of  a  ])hilosophic 
explanation,  but  which  in  that  of  Tertullian  merely  serve 
to  a  forensic  victory.  It  is  true  that  he  falls  into  some  in- 
accuracies, notably  in  declaring  that  Simon  Magus  was  wor- 
shipped as  a  god  in  Rome,  and  citing  as  evidence  the  existence 
of  a  statue  with  the  inscription  "  SLMONI  DEO  SANCTO."  Here 
also  he  is  followed  by  Tertullian,  but  not  l)y  the  better  in- 
structed Hippolytus,  who  had  probably  seen  the  inscription 
and  was  aware  that  it  referred  not  to  Simon  Magus,  but  to 
the  Sabine  deity  Semo  Sancus. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that  Justin's  quotations  from 
the  Old  Testament  are  for  the  most  part  correctly  given, 
while  those  from  the  New  differ  considerably  from  our  texts. 
The  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  In  the  former  Justin  had  the 
open  roll  before  him  ;  in  the  latter  he  trusted  to  his  memory. 
And  his  memory,  though  extensive,  was  not  always  accurate. 
He  speaks  of  Ilerod  as  sending  the  manuscript  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  to  Ptolemy,  an  error  of  more  than  a  century.  He 
speaks  of  Moses  as  keeping  the  flock  of  his  maternal  uncle, 
apparently  confounding  him  with  Jacob.  He  speaks  of 
Musonius  Rufus  as  suffering  death  for  his  freedom  of  speech, 
whereas  he  was  only  l)anished  and  afterwards  recalled.  He 
(piotes  several  passages  from  his  favourite  Plato  incorrectly. 
There  is  therefore  no  need  to  suppose  that  in  his  professed 
citations  from  the  words  of  Christ  and  the  memoirs  of  the 
Apostles  he  used  dilFerent  documents  from  those  which  have 
come  down  to  us.  The  question  how  far  he  was  in  posses- 
sion of  our  canonical  New  Testament  is  one  of  the  deepest 
the(jlogical  interest,  and  has  l)een  thoroughly  discussed  by 
many  able  writers,  notably  by  Westcott  and  Sanday.  The 
conclusion  at  which  they  arrive  is  that  tliough  he  departs 
more  or  less  widely  from  our  text,  and  adduces  some  details 
of  tradition  which  are  absent  from  our  New  Testament,  yet 
the  geneml  concurrence  of  fact  and  language  is  sufficiently 


JUSTIN.  337 

close  to  warrant  the  belief  that  most  of  our  documents  were 
known  to  him,  and  that  he  is  not  to  be  cited  as  a  witness  for 
any  apocryphal  (Jospel.  He  speaks  of  memoirs  written  by 
the  Apostles  and  their  followers  which  he  says  are  called 
Gospels,  a  sufficiently  exact  description  of  the  four  Canonical 
Gospels.  He  mentions  the  Apocalypse  by  name  and  attri- 
butes it  to  S.  John.  References  have  been  discovered  to  at 
least  four  of  S.  Paul's  Epistles  besides  that  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  there  are  abundant  traces  all  through  his  works  of 
familiarity  with  the  Pauline  teaching.  His  relation  to  our 
Bible  is  admirably  expressed  in  the  words  of  an  able  writer : 
"  The  Old  Testament  is  still  for  him  the  sacred  guide  and 
companion  of  the  Christian  life,  the  type  of  the  ivritten 
revelation  ;  everything  is  there.  Only  by  the  side  of  it  we 
already  feel  in  Justin  that  a  new  power  has  appeared,  a 
fresh  canon  is  forming,  another  book  is  just  beginning  to 
assert  itself.  It  is  just  because  Justin  appears  at  the  moment 
when  this  is  already  becoming  clear  that  his  work  is  full  of 
such  crucial  interest." 

His  style  is  thus  pithily  characterised  by  Otto,  one  of  his 
most  recent  and  careful  editors :  "  He  was  no  adept  in  the 
rhetorical  art.  His  language  rarely  departs  from  the  level 
of  common  life ;  the  order  of  the  sentences  is  often  involved, 
the  structure  of  single  clauses  sluggish  and  intricate,  the 
words  and  phrases  by  no  means  carefully  chosen.  He  con- 
fesses that  he  has  no  gift  of  eloquence ;  nor  does  he  think  it 
necessary  in  the  defence  of  the  Christian  cause.  Still  he 
sometimes  rises  to  a  higher  key,  especially  when  he  treats 
of  the  grandeur  of  Christian  truth  and  its  power  over  the 
human  mind."  For  details  the  reader  is  referred  to  the 
prolegomena  of  Otto's  edition  and  the  article  on  Justin  in 
Smith's  Biographical  Dictionary. 


J>^ 


CHAriEK  vr. 

T  ATI  AN  (a.d.   110-180?). 

The  name  of  Tatian  is  linked  witli  tliat  of  Justin.  They 
were  conteniponiiies  und  felluw-sojouiners  in  the  world's 
capital,  and  are  said  to  have  borne  the  intimate  relation  of 
master  and  pupil.  It  cannot  indeed  he  proved  that  Tatian's 
conversion  was  due  to  Justin,  but  the  inference  has  been 
made  from  the  remark  of  Irenaeus  that  "  Tatian,  after  Justin's 
death,  left  the  orthodox  faith,  and,  puffed  up  by  the  conceit 
of  a  teacher,  fell  into  divers  strange  errors."  ^ 

If  it  be  true  that  Justin's  moderating  influence  held  Tatian 
within  bounds,  we  shall  recognise  an  instance  of  what  is 
often  seen  in  daily  life — the  power  of  a  gentle  spirit  over  a 
fierce  one.  No  two  natures  could  be  more  unlike  than  that 
of  the  sympathetic,  reasonable  philosopher,  and  that  of  the 
ardent  but  sour  ascetic.  Tatian,  like  Tertulhan,  changed 
his  convictions  without  changing  his  temper.  As  in  the 
one,  so  in  the  other,  nature  asserted  itself  by  the  side  of 
grace.  In  both  cases  nationality  counted  for  something. 
Tatian  inherited  with  his  Assyrian  blood  that  harsh,  joyless 
view  of  religion  which  delights  to  crush  the  deei)est  instincts 
of  our  nature,  and  confounds  the  regeneration  with  the  anni- 
hilation of  manhood  Born  in  the  burnmg  region  beyond 
tlie  Tigris,  he  found  the  language  and  culture  of  Hellas 
universally  adopted  by  his  educated  countrymen;  l»ut  their 
Hellenism  was  tinged  with  oriental  elements,  and  not  free 
from  a  certain  charlatanism. 

The  youthful  zealot,  with  his  restless  temper  and  inquiring 
mind,  was  not  likely  to  find  this  satisfactory.     He  acted  lus 

*  Ircnanis  only  calls  bim  a  bearer  of  Justin  ;  and  Tatian,  tlioupb  he 
mentions  Justin  with  very  .M-...it  relief,  docs  not  ascribe  his  conversion 
to  him. 


TATIAN.  339 

many  before  and  since  have  acted :  he  endeavoured  to  find 
in  travel  a  solace  for  his  doubts.  He  learned  many  customs 
and  studied  many  systems,  but  could  not  shake  off  his  secret 
dissatisfaction,  and  might  possibly  as  a  baffled  sceptic  have 
acquiesced  in  the  prevailing  intellectual  despair  had  he  not 
at  this  critical  moment  come  across  a  copy  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Immediately  his  interest  was  aroused.  His  quick 
perception  saw  the  vast  difference  between  this  and  the  lite- 
rature with  which  he  had  been  familiar.  His  critical  sense 
was  delighted  by  its  simplicity  and  natural  truthfulness,  and 
his  intelligence  was  captivated  by  its  lofty  tone  of  thought. 
He  studied,  and  became  a  convert.  From  henceforth  he 
made  the  S  criptures  his  guide,  and  sought  to  prove  even  his 
errors  by  their  evidence.  The  account  of  his  conversion  is 
given  in  his  Oration  to  the  Greeks.  Though  it  says  nothing 
of  any  human  agent  as  co-operating  in  the  work,  we  need 
not  infer  that  such  agency  is  altogether  precluded.  At  the 
same  time  Tatian  speaks  as  one  who  has  fought  his  way  to 
truth  alone — an  uncompanionable  mind.  He  is  defective,  as 
might  be  supposed,  in  many  points  of  catholic  doctrine.  He 
never  once  alludes  to  baptism,  never  once  to  the  organisation 
of  the  Church.  How  different  from  Cyprian's  autobiogra- 
phical account  of  his  new  birth,  where  the  laver  of  baptism 
occupies  the  central  place,  and  admission  into  the  assembly 
of  the  redeemed  is  depicted  as  the  crown  of  blessedness ! 

Tatian,  unlike  Justin,  had  only  bitter  recollections  of 
heathenism.  He  had  tasted  both  its  studies  and  its  pleasures, 
and  the  experience  filled  him  with  disgust.  His  revolt  was 
final  and  complete :  paganism  became  for  him  a  mass  of 
contradictions,  illusions,  falsehoods  and  immoralities,  and 
nothing  more. 

We  should  be  glad  to  know  more  of  the  external  circum- 
stances of  his  career,  but  biographical  details  fail  us.  We 
know  not  even  where,  or  at  what  period  of  his  life,  he  turned 
to  Christ ;  probably  not  till  he  had  passed  his  youth.  Certain 
references  to  his  heathen  writings,  and  particularly  to  a 
treatise  on  zoology,^  seem  to  point  to  something  of  a  literary 

^  ire  pi  ^(.cojv. 


340  THK  APOLOGISTS. 

career.  Moroovor,  his  l)itter  sense  of  the  emptiness  of  pagan 
culture  \V(juld  come  most  naturally  at  a  time  of  life  when 
illusions  no  longer  satisfy,  and  pleasures  no  longer  attract. 
It  is  certain  that  he  settled  at  Jiome  and  remained  there 
several  years,  investigating  the  principles  of  Christian  truth, 
and  that  he  endjodied  some  of  liis  labours  in  a  "  Booh  of 
Qucstionji"  ^  dealing  with  what  was  hidden  and  obscure  in 
the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament.  This  important  work  is 
lost.  And  all  tliat  remains  of  his  orthodox  days  is  the  short 
Ajxtlogy,  known  as  the  Oration  to  the  Grccls-  wliich  is  our 
main  authority  for  his  views.  Opinions  differ  as  to  where 
it  was  written,  l)ut  probal)ility  inclines  to  Home,  either  shortly 
before  or  shortly  after  the  death  of  Justin. 

The  first  point  to  notice  with  regard  to  this  striking  work 
is  that  it  cannot  rightly  be  called  an  Apology  at  all.  Its  tone 
is  not  defensive,  but  aggressive.-^  It  is  a  powerful  onslaught 
on  heathenism,  coupled  with  a  terse  exposition  of  the  essen- 
tials of  Christianity.  It  professes  to  come  from  "one  who 
knows,"  not  by  hearsay,  but  by  experience.  Its  first  protest 
is  against  the  arrogance  of  Hellenism,  wliieli  llien  claimed 
for  itself  what  its  votaries  claim  for  it  now,  viz.,  t<:)  be  the 
source  and  guide  of  all  true  civilisation.  But  Tatian  denies 
this  altogether.  He  points  out  that  Greece  has  been  indebted 
to  the  despised  l)arl)arians  for  the  gift  of  nearly  all  her  arts 
and  sciences.  They  have  invented  and  slie  has  perfected. 
And  he  declares  the  same  to  be  true  of  religion.  All  the 
religious  ideas  of  Greece  are  either  imitations  or  perversions. 
Tlie  antiquity  of  Moses  and  the  prophets  demonstrates  their 
jiriority  ;  their  immense  spiritual  superiority  proves  them  the 
originals  and  the  Greek  legends  the  co])ies.  He  admits  a 
certain  ])rimeval  revelation,  Imt  makes  little  or  no  use  of  his 
admission.     He  says  : — 

"  My  soul  beinf^  tau^^ht  of  (Jotl,  1  discornod  tliat  the  former 
(i.f\,  henthon)  writings  l»';i(l  lo  condomn.ition,  hut  tliat  tlu'sc  jmt 

'  Tartavov  irpdi' VjWtjvai.     Notice  the  conden.sed  energy  of  this  title. 
^  It  may  be  compared  in  some  respects  with  Hermias'  It-risio  Gcntiliinn 
Philoaophoruin. 


TATIAN.  341 

an  end  to  the  slavery  that  is  in  the  world,  and  rescue  us  from  a 
multiplicity  of  rulers  and  ten  thousand  tyrants,  while  they  give 
us  not  indeed  what  ice  had  not  before  received^  but  what  we  had 
received,  but  were  prevented  by  error  from  retaining"  (ch.  xxix.). 

We  have  here  the  germ  of  that  theory  which  has  found 
favour  even  in  modern  times,  viz.,  that  a  certain  deposit  of 
revealed  truth  was  given  to  man  from  the  first,  which  was 
gradually  so  distorted  and  overlaid  by  superstition  as  to  have 
become  unrecognisable.  Historically,  perhaps,  this  theory 
has  now  died  a  natural  death;  but  from  the  metaphysical 
point  of  view  it  still  embodies  an  important  truth,  emphasis- 
ing the  unity  of  the  human  spirit,  and  the  divine  education 
of  the  race. 

There  is  little  besides  in  Tatian's  Oration  that  calls  for 
special  notice.  There  is  plenty  of  biting  satire,  plenty  of 
fiery  indignation.  There  is  sound  theology,  though  often 
obscurely  expressed ;  and  there  is  an  attempt  to  reconcile  a 
somewhat  spiritualistic  psychology  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  fiesh.  The  most  original  portion  is  the 
theory  of  dccmonic  natures,  on  which  he  dwells  with  a  certain 
predilection.  In  spite  of  its  generally  orthodox  tone,  the 
careful  critic  can  detect  in  it  seeds  of  heretical  thought,^ 
more  especially  in  the  view  that  through  Adam's  sin  man 
lost  the  Divine  likeness,  and  that  the  soul  is  consequently 
not  in  itself  immortal.  His  speculations,  in  fact,  though 
profound,  are  coloured  by  his  individual  bent,  and  range 
amid  mysterious  topics  which  Scripture  has  not  clearly 
revealed.  One  might  predict  that  the  mind  which  framed 
them  would  not  easily  confine  itself  within  the  limits  pre- 
scribed by  the  Church.  At  the  same  time,  justice  requires 
that  the  Oration  should  be  taken  by  itself,  and  not  be  made 
to  suffer  from  being  interpreted  by  his  later  aberrations. 
It  is  a  powerful  polemical  treatise,  full  of  condensed  thought 
and  strong  religious  conviction,  but  it  lacks  the  Christian 

1  Irenreus,  lynx-eyed  to  discern  the  smallest  aberration,  notes  no  less 
than  three  erroneous  tendencies  in  the  Oration  :  the  theory  of  permanent 
aeons,  that  of  Adam's  loss  of  salvation,  and  that  of  the  close  resemblance 
between  the  rational  and  brute  natures. 


342  Til?:  AI'OLO(;iSTS. 

cluirity  of  Justin's  works,  and  adds  little  to  the  religious 
heritage  of  the  Church.  The  finest  passage  is  where  he 
attacks  the  immoral  doctrine  that  man's  sin  is  due  not  to 
free-will  hut  to  fate.  This  wc  quote,  t(j  give  the  reader  an 
instance  of  his  style.  Our  translation  follows  that  of  the 
Ante-Niccnc  Lihrary: — 

"How,  then,  slmll  I  admit  this  nativity  accordinfj:  to  Fate, 
when  I  see  such  managers  of  Fate  ?  I  do  not  wish  to  be  a  king : 
I  nui  not  anxious  to  be  rich  :  I  decline  military  command  :  I 
detest  fornication  :  I  am  not  impelled  by  an  in.satial)le  love  of 
gain  to  go  to  sea  :  I  do  not  contend  for  chaplets  :  I  am  fiee  from 
a  mad  thirst  for  fame ;  I  despise  death  :  I  am  superior  to  every 
kind  of  disease ;  grief  does  not  consume  my  soul.^  Am  I  a  slave  ? 
1  endure  servitude.  Am  I  free  ?  I  do  not  vaunt  my  good  l)irth. 
I  see  that  the  same  sun  is  for  all,  and  one  death  for  all,  whether 
they  live  in  pleasure  or  destitution.  The  rich  man  sows,  and  the 
poor  man  partakes  of  the  same  sowing.  The  wealthiest  die,  and 
beggars  have  the  same  limits  to  their  life.  The  rich  lack  many 
things,  and  are  glorious  only  through  the  estimation  they  are 
held  in  ;  but  the  poor  man,  and  ho  who  has  moderate  desires, 
seeking,'  only  the  things  suited  to  his  lot,  more  easily  ol (tains  his 
purpose.  How  is  it  you  are  fated  to  be  sleepless  through  avarice  ? 
Why  are  you  fated  to  grasp  things  and  fail,  perhaps  die?  Die 
to  the  world,  repudiating  the  madness  that  is  in  it.  Live  to 
God,  and  by  apprehending  ]lim,  lay  aside  your  old  nature.  We 
were  not  created  to  die,  but  we  die  by  our  own  fault.  Our  free- 
\\  ill  has  destroyed  us  :  we  who  were  free  have  become  slaves  :  we 
are  sold  through  sin.  Nothing  evil  has  been  created  ])y  God. 
We  ourselves  have  manifested  wickedness ;  but  we,  who  have 
manifested  it,  arc  able  uL'ain  to  reject  it." 

The  reader  will  observe  ccjnsiderable  power  of  sarcasm 
here,   and    a    certain    rugged   eloquence.      The   attacks    on 

'  Tlu!  Latin  student  will  remember  the  stinginj;  words  of  Juvenal, 
which  Tatian  may  have  had  in  his  raind  (Sat.  iii.  41  aqq.):— 

**  Quid  Romae  faciam  ?  mentiri  nescio :  librum 
Si  malu.s  est,  noquoo  laudarc  ct  posccrc  :  motus 
Astroruni  ignore  :   fiinus  proraittere  patris 
Nee  volo  nee  iMDssum  :  rananmi  viscera  iuHi(]unm 
In.spcxi,"  *c. 


TATIAN.  343 

mythology,  the  drama,  and  the  games  are  also  vigorous  and 
at  times  brilliant.  The  small  compass  of  the  work  covers 
an  amount  of  matter  which,  in  a  theological  writer,  may 
well  strike  us  as  unusual.  But  this  compression  is  injurious 
to  clearness.  Few  treatises,  in  proportion  to  their  bulk,  task 
more  severely  the  attention  and  patience  of  the  reader. 

Besides  the  Oration  and  the  other  writings  already  re- 
ferred to,  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  the  Pauline  Epistles  and 
a  work  on  Christian  perfection,  which  last  may  have  con- 
tained allusions  to  the  heathen  mysteries,  in  more  than  one 
of  which  he  had  been  initiated. ^ 

It  is  uncertain  at  what  period  Tatian's  teaching  became 
definitely  heretical.  His  rugged,  independent  nature  was 
not  one  to  submit  unquestioningly  to  any  set  of  opinions. 
Moreover,  Eome  was  at  that  time  the  focus  of  every  variety 
of  speculation.  Irenaeus  is  our  authority  for  supposing  him 
to  have  been  infected  with  the  views  of  Valentinus ;  ^  Clement 
for  his  curious  misinterpretation  of  the  command  "  Let  there 
be  light "  into  a  prayer,  thus  showing  a  leaning  to  Marcion's 
error.  Jerome  ^  declares  him  to  have  been  the  patriarch  of 
the  Encratites,  and,  like  Marcion,  to  have  rejected  some  of 
S.  Paul's  Epistles.  The  form  of  error  with  which  he  was 
popularly  identified  was  that  of  Encratism.  But  it  must 
not  be  supposed  that  the  Encratites  formed  a  distinct  school, 
with  definite  tenets  that  marked  them  off  from  all  other 
schools.^  Encratism  represented  a  tendency  common  to 
several  schools,  some  comparatively  orthodox,  others  un- 
questionably heretical.  It  consisted  in  a  rigid  abstinence 
from  flesh  and  wine  as  well  as  from  sexual  intercourse. 
Such  abstinence  might  be  taught  as  a  counsel  of  perfection, 
or  even  as  a  duty,  without  involving  the  denial  that  these 
things  are  in  themselves  innocuous  and  permitted  by  God. 
For  instance,  there  is  undoubtedly  an  approval  of  Encratite 

1  This  work  is  quoted  by  Clement  (Str.  iii.  12),  and,  to  judge  from  the 
specimen  there  given,  was  extremely  obscure. 

-  Ir.  i.  28. 

•'  Preface  to  his  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  Titus. 

•*  iyKpare^s  or  iyKpaTrjTai  was  the  name  given  to  such  persons  as  incul- 
cated abstinence  on  heretical  principles. 


344  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

practice  in  S.  Taul ;  l)ul  he  distinctly  views  it  as  a  temporary 
expedient,  reeonmiended  on  account  of  the  present  distress 
and  the  consciences  of  the  weak  hrethren.  Again,  the  Ebio- 
nite  Christians  held  Encratite  views,  but  they  did  not,  any 
more  than  the  Essenes  whom  they  copied,  consider  them 
necessary  to  salvation.  The  peculiarity  of  Tatian's  Eucra- 
tism,  and  that  wliich  makes  it  heretical,  is  his  condemnation 
of  the  use  of  llesli  and  wine  as  in  itself  evil,  and  of  marriage 
as  essentially  impure,  diii'ering  only  conventionally  from  for- 
nication. The  close  correspondence  between  these  opinions 
and  those  of  Julius  Cassianus  has  been  referred  to  in  a  former 
chapter.^  The  Cliureh  has  always  refused  to  endorse  these 
views  ;  nay  more,  slie  has  sternly  condemned  them.  They 
depend  for  their  ultimate  foundation  on  the  anti-Christian 
theory  that  matter  is  essentially  evil,  and  therefore  not  the 
creation  of  the  Good  God.  There  is  no  decisive  proof  that 
Tatian  traced  them  to  their  logical  source,  or  denied,  as  the 
Gnostic  Encratites  undoubtedly  did  deny,  the  human  birth 
of  our  Saviour.  But  there  is  enough  resemblance  between 
these  teachers  to  justify  the  suspicion  with  whicli  Tatian 
came  to  be  regarded.  It  appears  that  he  found  his  position 
at  Rome  untenable,  and  retired  to  his  native  country,  where 
he  resided  till  liis  death,  abandoning  controversy,  and  preach- 
ing Christianity  as  he  understood  it  to  the  Syrian  tribes. 
His  success  in  that  field  was  immediate  and  enduring,  and 
was  due  to  a  great  extent  to  his  hitting  on  an  original  idea, 
which  is  now  trite  enough,  but  in  him  proved  the  inspiration 
of  genius.  This  was  tlie  consolidation  of  the  separate  Gospel 
narratives  into  a  single  history  of  moderate  compass,  whieh 
should  embody  tlie  main  features  of  all.  He  called  this 
harmonised,  or  more  correctly  speaking,  patchwork  Gospel, 
tlic  Diatessaroii,  or  Four/old  Record. 

The  Diatessaron. 

This  title  itself  is  an  evidential  monument  of  the  greatest 
significance.  It  proves  that  the  four  Gosi)els  were  accepted 
in  liis  day  not  only  by  the  Orthodox  Church,  but  by  those 

'  See  pai^e  231. 


TATIAN.  345 

who  in  various  respects  held  heretical  views.  Until  quite 
recently,  the  Diatessaron  has  been  to  the  Church  little  more 
than  a  name;  but  thanks  to  the  persevering  labours  of 
numerous  scholars,  and  above  all,  of  Zahn,  it  has  now  been 
substantially  recovered.  The  process  of  this  discovery  will 
be  indicated  later  on.  It  is  pleasant  to  think  of  the  restless, 
weary  controversialist,  after  long  wanderings  and  strange 
vicissitudes  of  faith,  turning  at  last  to  the  familiar  scenes  of 
his  youth,  and  spending  his  declining  energies  in  simple  mis- 
sionary work  among  a  people  ignorant  of  controversy,  and 
bequeathing  to  them  the  best  of  gifts — a  story  of  the  Saviour's 
life  adapted  to  their  intelligence  and  suited  to  their  needs. 

The  notices  of  the  Diatessaron  in  the  early  Church  are 
surprisingly  few.  Irenaeus  never  mentions  it.  Eusebius 
alludes  to  it,  but  only  in  the  most  meagre  terms  :  ^  "  Tatian 
composed  a  sort  of  connection,  or  compilation,  I  know  not 
how,  of  the  Gospels,  and  called  it  the  Diatessaron.  This 
work  is  current  in  some  quarters  to  the  present  day."  The 
words  "I  know  not  how"  ^  have  been  interpreted  to  imply 
that  Eusebius  had  never  seen  the  book,  but  this  cannot  be 
inferred  with  certainty.  As,  however,  there  is  strong  ground 
for  believing  that  Tatian  wrote  it  in  Syriac,  and  Eusebius 
was  ignorant  of  that  language,  the  historian  may  well  have 
seen  the  volume  in  the  library  of  Pamphilus  without  being 
in  a  position  to  criticise  its  contents. 

The  earliest  first-hand  notice  we  possess  is  in  the  work  of 
Theodoret  on  Heresies,  published  a.d.  453.  This  Father  was 
bishop  of  Cyrrhus,  near  the  Euphrates ;  and  he  tells  us  that 
in  the  exercise  of  his  pastoral  supervision  he  found  the 
Diatessaron  used  by  over  two  hundred  churches  in  his  dis- 
trict for  purposes  of  public  worship,  independently  of  its 
use  by  heretical  sects.  He  procured  a  copy  and  set  himself 
to  study  it.  As  he  expected,  he  found  it  gave  a  mutilated 
account  of   the   Gospel  narrative,  particularly  in  omitting 

^  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  29,  6. 

-  ovK  oW  birw.  Greek  scholars  need  not  be  informed  that  this  expres- 
sion does  not  always  indicate  ignorance,  but  quite  as  often  indifference, 
or  even  disapproval.     It  may  be  translated,  "  somehow  or  other." 


346  THE  APOLO(;iSTS. 

the  two  genealogies  of  Christ,  and  other  allusions  to  His 
human  birth  of  the  seed  of  David.  He  therefore  ordered  all 
existing  copies  to  be  collected  and  put  away,  and  replaced  in 
every  case  by  the  four  Canonical  Gospels. 

This  incident  reveals  to  us  the  long-continued  and  wide- 
spread influence  of  Tatian's  Harmony.  Nearly  three  cen- 
turies after  his  death  we  find  it  in  established  use  among 
a  wide  circle  of  orthodox  churches,  who  apparently  knew 
nothing  of  its  heretical  source  or  the  imperfection  of  its 
teaching.  The  progress  of  research  has  also  l)rought  to  light 
evidence  of  its  employment  in  the  Syrian  Church  at  a  still 
earlier  period.  A  commentary  on  it  by  S.  Ephraem,  Bishop 
of  Edessa  (A.D.  360),  was  said  by  Barsalibi,  an  Armenian 
bishop,  to  exist  in  his  day  (a.d.  1171),  and  this  statement  is 
proved  by  the  publication  of  Ephraem'scommentary  within  the 
last  few  years.  Twenty-five  years  further  back,  Aphraates, 
a  Persian  bishop,  who  resided  near  Mosul  (Nineveh),  wrote 
homilies  on  the  Gospels,  which  are  proved  to  be  founded  on 
Tatian's  Harmony,  and  estalilish  the  fact  that  it  was  the  only 
Gospel  in  use  among  the  Syrian  churches  of  that  neighbour- 
hood (a.d.  340),  while  as  early  as  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  in  a  romance  called  "  The  Doctrine  of  Addai  the 
Apostle,"  the  Diatessaron  is  mentioned  as  read  in  the  church 
service  conjointly  with  tlie  Old  Testament.  Both  this  work 
and  the  Connnentary  of  Kpliraem  expressly  call  the  Diates- 
saron "  Scripture." 

We  are  nf>w  in  a  position  to  trace  llic  jtrocess  which  has  led 
to  the  recovery  of  this  remarkable  work.^  The  first  evidence 
comes,  oddly  enough,  Uawi  tlie  Latin  Church.  Bishop  Victor 
of  Ca])ua  (a.d.  654)  discovered  a  Latin  l)ook  of  the  Gospels 
without  title  or  author's  name,  which  was  clearly  a  com- 
l)ilation  from  the  four  Canonical  liooks.  On  referring  to 
Kusebius  for  information,  he  found  noticesof  two  Harmonies, 
that  of  Tatian  and  that  of  Annnonius  of  Alexandria.  The 
principle  of  arrangement  not  agreeing  with  that  of  tlie  latter 

•  The  reader  is  referred  to  Hemphill  s  useful  work  on  tiie  Diatessaron, 
and  to  the  article  in  Smith's  Dictionary,  both  of  which  the  writer  has 
freelv  used. 


TATIAN.  347 

book,  Victor  came  to  the  conclusion  that  his  Latin  Harmony 
must  be  a  translation  of  Tatian's  Diatessaron.  His  con- 
clusion was  considered  by  scholars  to  be  erroneous,  and  little 
importance  was  attached  to  the  work  in  question.  But  sub- 
sequent discoveries  have  convinced  them  that  Victor  was  on 
the  whole  right,  and  that  we  have  for  many  centuries  pos- 
sessed the  substance  of  Tatian's  work  without  being  aware 
of  it. 

In  1806  an  Armenian  version  of  Ephraem's  commentary, 
dating  from  the  fifth  century,  was  printed  at  Venice,  and 
was  translated  into  Latin  by  one  of  the  Mechitarist  monks 
of  that  city,  and  published  by  Dr.  Mosinger  in  1876.  A 
comparison  of  this  translation  with  Victor's  Harmony  estab- 
lished their  substantial  identity,  the  differences  being  chiefly 
due  to  the  correction  of  the  old  Latin  text  by  S.  Jerome's 
version,  the  order  remaining  on  the  whole  unchanged. 
.  Yet  another  link  in  the  chain  of  discovery  was  subse- 
quently discovered.  Every  one  knows  that,  after  the  Sara- 
cens had  conquered  Syria,  the  Syrian  Christians  gradually 
forgot  their  native  tongue  and  adopted  that  of  their  con- 
querors. Along  with  other  sacred  documents,  the  Diatessaron 
was  in  process  of  time  translated  into  Arabic.  It  had  long 
been  known  that  an  Arabic  MS.,  entitled  Tatian's  Harmony, 
existed  in  the  Vatican.  But  for  some  reason  or  other  it  had 
not  been  transcribed.  In  1886  Antonius  Morcos,  Vicar 
Apostolic  of  the  Catholic  Copts,  happening  to  visit  the  Vati- 
can, and  being  shown  the  MS.  in  question,  declared  that  he 
had  seen  a  similar  one  in  Egypt,  and  in  better  preservation. 
This  was  found  to  be  the  case,  and  the  MS.  was  duly  collated, 
and  published  on  the  occasion  of  Pope  Leo's  jubilee.  It 
dates  from  the  eleventh  century,  and  is  a  translation  of  a 
Syriac  original  of  some  two  centuries  earlier.  The  contents 
and  arrangement  are  clearly  the  same  as  those  of  Ephraem's 
commentary  and  Victor's  Latin  Harmony.  The  text,  how- 
ever, is  different  from  both,  being  polished  and  revised  in 
a  manner  analogous  to  that  in  wliich  Victor's  Latin  was  re- 
fined into  the  Vulgate  Latin  of  the  Codex  Fuldcnsis  (a.d.  500), 
the  MS.  in  which  it  is  embodied.     It  is  evident,  therefore. 


348  I  111-:  APOLOGISTS. 

Unit  thoiigli  the  .sulhstance  is  complete,  the  form  lias  uiidcr- 
gone  alteration. 

In  order  to  arrive  at  the  expressions  actually  used  by 
Tatian,  it  is  necessary  to  go  back  to  Ephraem's  fragments 
and  I  he  eitiitions  by  Aphraates.  Ephraem  in  his  Armenian 
(hess  is  very  faitliful  to  tlie  original:  but  Apln-aates'  Syriac 
citations  alone  give  the  ipsisdma  verba  of  Tatian. 

Finally,  there  is  some  evidence  that  even  in  the  Greek- 
speaking  churches  the  Diatessaron  was  not  wholly  unknown. 
In  A.D.  1523  the  Humanist  Luscinius  puldislied  an  epitome 
of  the  Gospel  History  entitled  "  Evangelicac  historiae  ex 
qicatnor  Evangelistis  perpetuo  tenor c  continuata  narratio  ex 
Ammonii  Alcxandrini  frafpnentis  qiiibusdaiii.^'  He  is  no 
doubt  in  error  in  su})p()sing  Ids  Greek  epitome  to  be  the 
work  of  Ammonius :  but  he  seems  to  have  been  equally 
ignorant  of  Tatian  and  of  Victor's  Harmony :  Zahn  declares 
that  the  fragment  shows  clear  traces  of  the  Diatessaron, 
and  tluis  it  would  seem  that  in  both  the  Greek  and  Latin 
churches  an  attempt  was  made  to  utilise  it. 

It  was,  however,  in  tlie  Syrian  Church  that  it  found  its 
proper  home,  and  there  is  no  reasonable  doul)t  tliat  it  ap- 
peared first  in  Syriac. 

On  leaving  Home,  Tatian  probably  spent  a  short  time  at 
Alexandria,  wliere  he  has  left  traces  of  his  teaching.  But 
his  ictiremcnt  to  ^lesopotamia  was  virtually  the  surrender 
of  his  ]M)sition  as  a  Greek  theologian.  During  the  remainder 
of  liis  life  he  seems  to  liave  reverted  to  Syriac  as  the  vehicle 
of  his  literary  composition,  as  of  course  it  was  of  his  oral 
preaching.  I  If  dii-d  at  Edessa,  somewhere  about  180  A.D., 
liaving  accoiuplishiMl  Ids  life's  work. 

His  idea  of  an  eclectic  Gospel  was  as  ha]>py  as  it  was 
original.  It  icinains  to  discuss  the  principle  on  which  he 
carricMl  it  out.  We  must  remember  tliat  his  fii-st  object 
was  suital»ility  for  public  use.  The  consistency  at  which  he 
aimed  was  rather  moral  than  historical.  For  this  purpose 
he  places  several  events  out  of  their  ])roper  order  to  liring 
out  more  vividly  the  spiritual  lesson  they  embody.  The 
general  basis  of  the  work  is  the  (losjtcl  of  S.  Matthew,  wliich 


TATIAN.  349 

carries  the  thread  of  the  liistory  from  beginning  to  end.  S. 
Mark  does  not  supply  much.  The  portions  from  both  these 
Evangelists  are  incorporated  nearly  in  their  chronological 
order.  Those  from  S.  Luke  and  S.  John,  on  the  contrary,  are 
fitted  in  with  small  reference  to  order  or  chronology,  though 
frequent  use  is  made  of  S.  John's  characteristic  passages  for 
emphasising  spiritual  lessons  and  clenching  historical  effects. 
It  is  clear  that  S.  John's  thoughts  had  a  great  attraction  for 
Tatian.  We  may  describe  his  aim  as  being  to  comprise  in 
an  edifying  form  every  important  event  in  Christ's  history 
without  apparent  contradictions.  The  entire  scheme  is  worth 
reproducing  as  an  indication  of  his  skill.  We  borrow  the 
analysis  from  Mr.  Hemphill : — 

"  It  commences  with  the  Preface  from  8.  John  on  the  Lo£:os 
and  the  Incarnation ;  it  then  goes  on  to  the  birth  of  the  Fore- 
runner ;  the  Annunciation  ;  the  communications  of  Joseph  with 
the  angel;  the  scenes  at  Bethlehem,  the  Birth,  Presentation, 
Magi,  and  flight  into  Egypt.  Then  follow — Jesus  in  the  temple. 
John  a  preacher  of  repentance.  John's  testimony  to  Christ. 
John's  baptism.  He  baptizes  Jesus.  The  temptation.  The 
five  disciples.  The  first  miracle.  Jesus  preaches  at  Nazareth. 
Calls  the  disciples  fishing.  The  miraculous  draught.  John's 
second  testimony.  His  imprisonment.  The  nobleman's  son. 
Jesus  goes  to  Zebulun  and  Naphtali.  The  demoniac  in  the  syna- 
gogue. Calling  of  Matthew.  Christ's  cures  and  ministry.  Call 
of  Levi.  Paralytic  healed.  Levi's  feast.  Discourse  on  fasting. 
The  plucking  of  the  ears  of  corn.  His  relatives  think  Him  be- 
side Himself.  The  withered  hand.  He  prays  on  the  mount  and 
chooses  the  Twelve.  Sermon  on  the  mount.  The  centurion's 
servant.  The  widow's  son.  The  foxes  have  holes.  The  stilling: 
of  the  tempest.  The  demoniac  of  Gadara.  Jairus'  daughter. 
The  two  blind  men  and  the  dumb  spirit.  Mission  of  the 
Twelve.  Martha  and  Mary.  Preaching  of  the  Apostles.  Mes- 
sage of  John  Baptist.  Blind  and  dumb  healed.  Blasphemy 
against  Christ.  Beport  of  the  Apostles.  The  woman  that  was 
a  sinner.  The  two  debtors.  Many  believe.  Mission  of  the 
seventy.  The  invitation.  Doctrine  of  the  Cross.  Parables  of 
the  tower  and  the  king.  The  Jews  seek  a  sign.  The  woman 
blesses  Christ.      His  mother  and  His  brethren.     Circuit  with  the 


350  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

disciples  and  holy  women.  Teaching'  on*  the  shore.  Tlie  sower. 
The  seed  in  secret.  The  tares.  The  mustard-seed.  The  leaven. 
Explanation  of  the  tares.  The  treasure,  the  pearl,  and  the  net. 
His  rejection  at  Nazareth.  Herod's  idea  of  Christ.  John's  martyr- 
dom. Feeding  of  the  five  thousand.  Walkin<:j  on  the  sea.  Doc- 
trine of  the  liread  of  Life.  Jesus  dines  with  the  Pharisee.  The 
Syrophfenician  woman.  Tiie  deaf  mute  at  Decapolis.  The  woman 
of  Samaria.  The  leper  and  what  follows.  The  pool  of  Bethesda. 
Feeding  of  the  four  thousand.  The  leaven  of  the  Pharisees.  The 
Mind  man  of  Bethsaida.  Peter's  confession.  Prophecy  of  His 
Passion.  l{e})roof  of  Peter,  The  transfigui'ation.  The  crowd 
meets  Him.  Herod's  threat.  The  demoniac  boy.  Second  pro- 
phecy of  the  Passion.  The  temple-tribute.  The  little  child.  On 
offences.  On  divorce.  On  children  coming  to  Him.  The  lost  sheep. 
Tlie  ten  drachmae.  The  prodigal  son.  The  unjust  steward.  The 
unmerciful  servant.  Peter's  question  about  forgiveness.  On  wilful 
and  ignorant  sinners.  The  Galileans.  The  tower  of  Siloam.  The 
tig-tree.  The  woman  with  a  spirit  of  infirmity.  The  feast  of  taber- 
nacles. The  rich  fool.  The  young  ruler.  Dives  and  Lazarus. 
The  labourers  in  the  vineyard.  In  the  Pharisee's  house.  The 
man  with  dropsy.  Tlie  king's  son  and  the  great  supper.  The  ten 
lepera.  James  and  John's  request.  Few  to  be  saved.  Zacchaeus. 
Bartima^us.  The  pounds.  The  cleansing  of  the  temple.  The  trea- 
sury. The  Pharisee  and  the  publican.  Bethany.  The  barren 
fig-tree.  Nicodemus.  Discourse  on  the  power  of  faith.  The 
unjust  judge.  Parable  of  the  two  sons.  Of  the  wicked  husband- 
men. The  tribute-money.  Doctrine  of  marriage  and  the  re- 
surrection. The  great  commandment.  The  good  Samaritan. 
Teaching  on  the  last  day  of  the  feast.  What  think  ye  of  Christ  ? 
The  Light  of  the  world.  The  man  born  blind.  Lazjirus.  Jesus 
at  Ephraim.  Simon  the  leper.  The  triumphal  entry.  Envy  of 
the  chief  priests.  Inquiry  of  the  Greeks.  The  Pharisees  ques- 
tion Him.  Lament  over  Jerusalem  and  denunciation  of  the 
Pharisees.  Christ  tleclares  His  words  eternal.  The  Scribes  seek 
to  entrap  Him.  The  disciples  and  the  temple.  The  priests'  plot. 
The  last  prophecy  on  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  faithful  and 
unfaithful  stewards.  The  ten  virgins.  The  talents.  The  warn- 
ing to  watch.  The  judgment  of  the  nations.  Judas  and  the 
chief  priests.  Christ  the  servant.  The  disciples  prepare  the 
passover.  The  Loixl's  Supi>er.  The  new  commandment.  Christ 
comforts  the  disciples.     The  two  swords.     The  last  discoui-se.     The 


TATIAN.  351 

high-priestly  prayer.  Gethsemane.  The  betrayal.  Peter's  first 
denial.  The  high  priest's  question.  Peter's  second  and  third 
denials.  The  false  witness.  Jesus  condemned.  He  is  brought 
before  Pilate.  Herod.  Pilate's  wife.  Barabbas.  The  flagella- 
tion and  mocking.  Pilate  yields.  Suicide  of  Judas.  Crucifixion. 
The  Seven  Words.  The  Tenebra^.  The  pierced  side.  The  woman 
by  the  cross.  Joseph  of  Arimathea.  Sealing  of  the  tomb.  The 
resurrection.  Mary  Magdalene.  The  story  of  the  bribing  of  the 
guards.  Jesus  appears  to  the  women.  Emmaus.  Tiie  upper 
room.  Thomas.  The  Sea  of  Galilee.  His  commission  to  the 
Apostles.     His  ascension." 

Such  is  a  brief  epitome  of  this  famous  work.  It  obviously 
affirms  the  historical  credibility  of  the  four  Gospels,  and 
finds  no  difficulty  in  their  apparent  discrepancies,  treating 
these  with  considerable  freedom,  and  without  any  disposi- 
tion to  regard  the  chronology  of  any  of  them  as  infallible. 
Though  the  narrative  is  based  on  S.  Matthew,  S.  John  is 
perhaps  Tatian's  favourite  Evangelist.  He  appears  to  have 
inserted  one  or  two  details  from  the  apocryphal  tradition, 
and  in  two  cases  to  have  followed  other  records  in  the  New 
Testament,  the  death  of  Judas  being  taken  from  the  Acts 
and  the  account  of  the  Last  Supper  from  the  First  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians. 

The  sinister  reputation  of  the  author  for  heresy  doubtless 
had  much  to  do  with  the  non-recognition  of  the  work  in  the 
Greek  and  Latin  churches.  But  it  is  also  probable  that  its 
circulation  in  an  Oriental  language,  and  in  a  limited  region  of 
the  Christian  world,  may  have  caused  it  to  be  practically 
unknown  in  the  greater  centres  of  church  life.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  we  find  that  at  a  later  period,  when  there  were  direct 
relations  between  the  Eoman  and  Syrian  churches,  and  trans- 
lations of  Syriac  works  into  Latin  began  to  be  undertaken, 
the  Diatessaron  was  among  those  which  were  so  translated.^ 
In  any  case,  we  may  cordially  endorse  the  words  of  an  able 
writer,  that  "  Tatian,  by  his  very  errors,  served  the  Church." 

^  See  article  in  Smith's  Dictionary,  vol.  iii.  p.  796. 


CHAITKIJ   VII. 

THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  CHURCH  HISTORY-HEGESIPPUS 
(a.d.  115?- a.d.  185?). 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  multitude  of  stories  and 
legends  concerning  the  great  masters  of  the  faith  were 
circulated  at  a  very  early  date.  In  times  of  spiritual 
enthusiasm,  when  men's  minds  are  strung  high  by  hope  or 
suffering,  the  creative  imagination  finds  abundant  scope  for 
action  in  the  daily  record  of  adventure,  peril,  conflict,  vic- 
tory, or  death.  We  can  well  believe  that  it  was  one,  and 
not  the  least  arduous,  of  the  Apostles'  tasks  while  they  lived 
to  withstand  this  prevalent  tendency.  And  it  is  to  their 
firm  and  sober  guidance  under  God  that  we  owe  the  complete 
immunity  of  the  New  Testament  writings  from  legendary 
matter.  But  this  restraint  of  the  pious  imagination,  always 
ditlicult,  was  not  to  be  expected  in  the  succeeding  age.  In 
Palestine  especially,  where,  if  we  may  say  so,  supernaturalism 
was  the  order  of  the  day,  a  cycle  of  apocryphal  stories  soon 
clustcrL'd  roimd  the  chief  names  of  the  Church,  and  gave 
birth  in  later  times  to  a  regular  literature,  which  lias  ]>een 
referred  to  in  a  former  book.  But,  besides  these,  a  large 
number  of  traditions,  more  or  less  authentic,  were  current 
among  believers,  partly  supplementing  the  inspired  narrative 
by  details  on  which  a  natural  curiosity  sought  to  be  informed, 
and  partly  satisfying  tliat  craving  for  the  marvellous  in 
which  a  half-educated  and  uncritical  society  finds  so  strong 
a  support  to  its  faith. 

By  far  the  greater  number  of  the  Church  writers  whose 
names  have  come  down  to  us  were  men  of  Hellenic  culture 
and  authoritiitive  position,  whose  minds  moved  in  a  sphere 
of  doctrinal   disputation   or   ecclesiastical   organisation    far 


HEGESIPrUS.  353 

removed  from  the  more  plebeian  but  more  romantic  field  of 
popular  religious  literature.  In  the  Acts  of  Martyrdom,  as 
they  are  called,  such  as  those  of  Polycarp,  of  Justin,  and  of 
the  churches  of  Vienne,  we  are  brought  within  the  domain 
of  popular  Christian  thought,  which  in  these  instances  found 
a  literary  expression,  but  which  was  mostly  embodied  in 
oral  traditions  or  simple  written  narratives  devoid  of  style, 
though  none  the  less  widely  circulated  and  highly  prized. 
The  work  of  Papias  was  the  first  which  attempted  to  collect 
together  a  comprehensive  body  of  this  material,  and  to 
subject  it  to  a  sifting  process.  Even  in  his  time  a  consider- 
able element  of  untrustworthy  legend  had  inwoven  itself  into 
the  traditionally  accepted  fabric.  If  the  fragment  on  the 
death  of  Judas,  attributed  to  him  by  Apollinaris  of  Laodicea,i 
be  genuine,  to  say  nothing  of  the  gross  and  repulsive  amplifi- 
cation of  it  given  by  Theophylact,^  we  can  easily  see  how  the 
popular  craving  for  poetic  justice  had  superseded  the  simple 
story  of  the  Gospel  by  a  more  dramatic  and  sensational 
version.  And  what  happened  in  this  instance  undoubtedly 
happened  in  countless  others.  The  mythical  account  of  S. 
Peter's  conflicts  with  Simon  Magus,  given  in  the  Clemen- 
tines, was  no  doubt  a  spontaneous  growth  of  the  pious  imagi- 
nation, and  was  adopted  by  the  writer  to  make  his  theological 
arguments  more  attractive.  It  is  not  necessary  to  refer  all 
these  legends  to  heretical  sources ;  it  is  far  more  likely  that 
they  formed  an  undercurrent  of  popular  tradition,  generally 
accepted  by  simpler  folk,  and  only  gradually  expunged  from 
use  by  the  growing  sense  of  its  uncertified  and  unapostolic 
origin,  and  through  its  unwarrantable  adoption  by  heretical  or 
semi-heretical  sects.  It  is,  in  fact,  a  matter  for  regret  that 
the  work  of  reviewing  it  was  undertaken  only  by  men  of 
second-rate  al)ility.    Their  lack  of  critical  insight  discredited 

^  Quoted  by  Routh,  Rel.  Sac.  vol.  i.  p.  9. 

-  See  Routh,  ib.  p.  26.  It  is  usual  to  reject  these  additions  as  spurious, 
but  there  hardly  seems  to  be  sufficient  ground  for  this.  Puerile  and  un- 
edifying  as  the  story  is,  the  account  is  hardly  likely  to  have  been  invented 
so  late  as  the  time  of  Theophylact,  and  the  narrative  in  Acts  i.  18  shows 
that  even  in  the  apostolic  age  there  was  more  than  one  version  of  the 
traitor's  death. 

Z 


354  'I'HE  APOLO(;iSTS. 

tlic  wIk.Ic  subject,  and  disposed  tlic  ecclesiastics  of  the  Nicene 
l)eriod  to  pass  it  over  without  iiutice,  and  relegate  it  to  wliat 
they  considered  well-merited  oblivion. 

Our  concern  at  the  loss  of  Papias'  work  is  renewed  in  the 
case  of  liis  successor  in  a  similar  field,  the  Jewish-Christian 
writer  Hegesippus,  of  wliose  five  books  of  Miscellanies  of 
Cliristian  Tnidlt ion  ^  only  a  few  fragments  are  preserved. 
This  writer,  who  came  from  l*alestine,  and  was  evidently 
well  ac(|uainted  with  the  condition  of  its  churches,  by  his 
clear,  straightforward  narratives  made  a  very  favourable  im- 
pression on  Eusebius.  Unlike  Papias,  for  whom  the  historian 
has  scant  respect,  he  speaks  of  Hegesippus  as  a  repository  of 
the  genuine  apostolic  tradition,^  and  quotes  him  several  times 
as  a  trustw^orthy  authority.  Our  knowledge  of  his  life  is 
unfortunately  Ijut  meagre.  From  his  own  statement  that  he 
puljlished  during  the  episcopate  of  Eleutherus  (a.d.  175-189), 
presumal)ly  when  in  ad^'anced  age,  we  may  fix  his  birth 
approximately  A.D.  11 5- 120,  which  would  agree  fairly  well 
witli  S.  Jerome's  assertion  that  he  bordered  on  the  apostolic 
age.^ 

It  has  generally  been  considered  that  he  was  by  birth  a 
Jew,  and  converted  to  Christianity  in  Jerusalem.  But  this 
is  quite  uncertain.  It  is  just  as  possible  that  he  was  born 
of  Christian  parents,  though  his  introduction  of  Hebrew 
words,  his  intimate  knowledge  of  non-Christian  Jewish  sects, 
and  his  enthusiastic  admiration  of  S.  James,  all  point  to 
his  being  a  Christian  of  the  circumcision.  He  did  not,  how- 
ever, confine  his  sympathies  to  the  Christianity  of  his  native 
land.  Mr  was  of  a  large  and  incpiiring  mind,  and  deter- 
mine(l  to  judge  by  jjcrsonal  inspection  how  far  the  leailing 
churches  of  the  West  had  remained  true  to  the  apostolic 
faith.  For  this  p\irpose  he  made  a  voyage  to  Pome,  toui-h- 
ing  ])robably  at  many  Christian  centres  on  his  route,  ami  in 
particular  at  Corinth,  wliere  he  tells  us  he  paid  a  long  and 

*  -Klvrt  virotiv-ntiaTa  iKKX-noiacriKCiv  Trpdifw*'— literally,  "live  memoranda 
of  ecclesia-stical  Acts." 

'  See  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  8.     l\v  says,  ov  irXdarai^  KfXPW^^^-  0'^»'a'"s. 
'  Vicinus  Ai)Ostolorum  temi)oribus.  —  Ih   Vir.  Illm^tr.,  c.  22. 


HEGESIPPUS.  355 

happy  visit  to  its  bishop,  Primus,  and  was  pleased  to  bear 
emphatic  witness  to  the  soundness  of  his  teaching.  He 
arrived  at  Eome  during  the  pontificate  of  Anicetus  (the 
most  probable  date  of  which  is  from  A.D.  156  to  A.D.  167), 
and  drew  up  a  list  of  the  succession  of  Eoman  bishops, 
which  he  afterwards  brought  up  to  date  by  the  addition  of 
Soter  and  Eleutherus,  Anicetus'  immediate  successors.  It  is 
clear  from  more  than  one  allusion  that  he  had  commenced 
his  work  several  years  before  he  published  it.  This  will 
account  for  a  passage,  which  has  caused  some  perplexity  to 
critics,  stating  that  the  deification  and  cultus  of  Hadrian's 
favourite  Antinous  took  place  in  his  time.^ 

He  is  usually  spoken  of  as  the  Father  of  Church  History, 
and  as  such,  the  precursor  of  Eusebius.  But  there  hardly 
seems  sufficient  ground  for  crediting  him  with  so  systematic 
a  design  as  that  of  a  complete  history  of  the  Church.  Both 
Eusebius  and  Jerome  lay  stress  upon  the  plain  unpretending 
character  of  his  writing's,  and  from  their  references  to  them  we 
can  see  that  they  w^ere  not  chronologically  arranged.  Their 
title  rather  implies  that  they  contained  miscellaneous  re- 
collections of  noteworthy  facts  as  to  the  personal  history 
and  opinions  of  leading  members  of  the  Church,  both  in 
Palestine  and  other  parts  of  the  world,  as  well  as  a  general 
criticism  of  the  comparative  orthodoxy  of  the  various 
churches. 

The  question  has  been  much  discussed  whether  Hegesippus 
was  a  Judaiser  in  the  narrow  sense  of  the  word  or  an 
orthodcjx  Catholic.  Our  impression,  from  Eusebius'  high 
praise  of  him,  would  be  decidedly  in  favour  of  the  latter  view. 
But  there  is  a  fragment  preserved  by  Photius  2  in  which  he 
is  quoted  as  saying  with  reference  to  the  words,  "  Eye  hath 
not  seen  nor  ear  heard,  neither  have  entered  into  the  heart  of 
man,  the  things  which  CJod  hatli  prepared  for  the  just,"  that 
"  Such  words  are  spoken  in  vain,  and  those  who  use  them  lie 
against  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Lord,  who  says, '  Blessed 

^  Hadrian  died  a.d.  138  ;  but  possibly  a  few  years  may  have  elapsed 
before  the  ceremonial  of  Antinous'  worship  was  completed. 
2  Routh,  R.  S.  i.  p.  219. 


356  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

are  your  eyes  for  tliey  see,  and  your  ears  for  lliey  hear.' " 
And  since  these  words  (as  is  well  known)  are  ( quoted  l)y 
S.  Paul  in  tlie  First  Ei)istle  to  the  Corinthians/  it  has  been 
argued  tliat  Hegesii)pus  is  attacking  the  Apostle's  interpre- 
tation of  them  and  betraying  an  Ebionite  or  anti-Pauline 
tendency.  The  great  authority  of  Baur  lent  for  a  while 
plausibihty  to  this  view,  but  it  will  not  bear  examination. 
In  tlie  first  place,  the  quotation  is  not  given  in  the  form  in 
which  S.  Paul  gives  it,  the  words  "  the  just "  being  substi- 
tuted for  "  them  that  love  him,"  a  very  significant  change. 
And  in  the  second  place,  we  know  from  Hippolytus  that 
the  Gnostic  teachers  were  peculiarly  addicted  to  the  use  of 
this  text,"  applying  it,  not  as  S.  I'aul  does,  to  the  condition 
of  the  religious  world  before  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but  to  the  condition  of  those  Christians  who  did  not 
Ljain  the  advantage  of  the  Gnostic  sacrament  of  initiation.^ 
On  so  slender  a  ground  as  this,  it  is  quite  unwarrantable  to 
charge  Hegesippus  with  hostility  to  S.  Paul.  The  same 
suspicion  with  which  the  Tiibingen  school  regard  Papias, 
from  his  testimony  to  the  early  date  of  the  Gospels  and  the 
unity  of  the  faith,  has  biassed  their  judgment  in  the  case  of 
Hegesippus  also.  And  the  reply  is  in  both  cases  the  same. 
The  object  of  these  men's  hostility  was  not  S.  Paul  or  the 
Pauline  school  of  theology,  but  tlie  Gnostic  misinterpreters 
of  Scripture  and  perNcrters  of  Catholic  truth. 

The  activity  of  Hege8ipi)us,  it  will  thus  be  seen,  falls  at  or 
aljout  tlie  middle  of  the  second  century,  almost  contem}»orary 
witli  that  of  Justin.  From  liis  Palestinian  training,  liow- 
<'ver,  he  gives  one  tlie  impression  of  a  imicli  more  archaic 
writer.  We  are  indebted  to  Fusebius  for  the  preservation 
of  several  characteristic  fragments,  two  of  which,  from  their 
great  interest,  we  propose  to  give  at  length.  Fusebius  also 
informs  us  that  Hegesipi>us  travelled  widely  in  Syria,  Greece 
and   Italy,  collecting   materials    for  his  luininiscnurs.     His 

'   I  Cor.  xi.  9,  re  ft- rr  in;;:  to  Is.  Ixiv.  4. 

-  The  reader  will  remember  that  the  woril.s  in  question  arc  not  quoted 
exactly  either  by  S.  Paul  or  by  Hegesippus. 

••  Sensc-Christiatis  (^I'xti'oO  as  opposed  to  Sj,irit-Christi<t)is  {irvd/iaTucol). 


HEGESIPPUS.  357 

main  object,  which  l)etrays  his  Judaic  bent,  is  to  ascertain 
how  closely  each  church  keeps  to  the  traditional  deposit  of 
faith.     In  this  he  resembles  Iren^eus  and  Tertullian,  who 
regard  with  aversion  any  approach  to  freedom  of  thought. 
His  tour  of  inspection  proved  eminently  satisfactory,  and 
his  report  was  that  the  apostolic  churches,  without  excep- 
tion, maintained  the  truth  inviolate.      His  account  of  the 
rise  of  error  in  that  of  Jerusalem  has  been  severely  criti- 
cised;   he  attributes  it  to  one   Thebuthis,i   not   otherwise 
known.     But  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  his  story,  as 
he  liad  ample  opportunities  of  knowledge.     The  historical 
method  which  he   adopted,  though  not  very   scientifically 
carried  out,  marks  him  as  a  man  of  strong  common  sense.    To 
the  unsettling  theories  and  multiform  speculations  of  Gnos- 
ticism he  opposed  the  one  consistent  doctrine  transmitted 
by  succession  from  the  Apostles  ^  in  every  one  of  the  existing 
apostolical  churches,  verified-  in  each  case  by  himself ;  and 
therefore  to  him,  more  properly  than  to  Irenaeus,  should  be 
assigned  the  credit  of  fixing  the  fundamental  principle  of 
orthodoxy,  which  the  Western  Church,  by  means  of  its  long 
list  of  eloquent  expositors,  has  made  so  thoroughly  its  own. 

The  first  specimen  of  his  style  that  we  shall  give  is  his 
account  of  the  martyrdom  of  S.  James  :  -^ — 

Death  of  James  the  Just. 

"  The  government  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  was  entrusted 
conjointly  with  the  Apostles  to  James  the  Lord's  brother,  who 
was  universally  surnamed  the  Just  from  the  Lord's  time  to  our 

1  "On  this  account  I  called  the  Church  a  virgin,  for  she  was  not  yet 
defiled  with  vain  rumours.  Thebuthis  it  was  who,  disappointed  at  not 
being  elected  bishop,  began  to  undermine  her."  He  places  this  heresiarch 
shortly  after  the  martyrdom  of  James  the  Just.     (See  Ronth,  p.  215.) 

'-2  It' is  true  he  used  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  but  probably 
not  so  as  to  estalslish  any  doctrine  by  it.  It  is  a  highly  significant  fact 
that  this  archaic-minded  Jewish  Christian  adopts  the  very  same  criterion 
of  orthodoxy  as  the  more  progressive  spirits  of  the  West,  viz.,  the  con- 
sensus of  those  churches  which  could  point  to  an  Apostle  as  their  founder. 
The  reader  will  find  this  point  referred  to  again  in  the  chapter  on  Ter- 
tullian.    Its  controversial  importance  can  hardly  be  exaggerated. 

3  Eus.  H.  E.  ii.  23. 


358  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

own.  Tlic  naiiu'  James  was  common  enough  :  but  tliis  man  was 
holy  from  liis  mother's  woml).  He  drank  neither  wine  nor 
strong  drink,  and  ate  nothing  that  had  life.  No  razor  ever 
passed  upon  his  head.  lie  never  anointed  himself  with  oil,  never 
used  a  bath.  lie  alone  (of  Christians)  was  allowed  to  enter  the 
Holy  Place.  For  he  wore  no  woollen  cloiliing,  but  only  linen, 
and  used  to  enter  unaccompanied  into  the  shrine,  and  was  (often) 
found  fallen  upon  his  knees,  asking  pardon  for  the  people  :  so 
that  his  knees  {jrew  hard  like  those  of  a  camel  from  his  constant 
habit  of  kneeling  in  prayer  to  God,  and  asking  pardon  for  the 
people.  From  his  exceeding  righteousness  he  was  called  Tsaddik  ^ 
and  Oblias,-  which  in  Greek  mean  '  defence  of  the  people '  and 
'  righteousness,'  even  as  the  prophets  indicate  of  him.  Now 
certain  of  the  seven  Jewish  sects  already  mentioned  in  my  Remi- 
niscences asked  of  him,  AVhat  is  the  door  of  Jesus?  His  reply 
was  that  Jesus  was  the  Saviour,  and  so  some  of  them  believed 
that  Jesus  was  the  Christ.  r>ut  the  before-mentioned  sects 
neither  1)elieved  in  His  resurrection,  nor  in  His  coming  again  to 
reward  every  man  according  to  his  works.  Ilowbeit  those  who 
believed,  believed  through  James.  And  since  many  of  the  rulers 
believed,  there  arose  a  tumult  of  the  Jews  and  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees,  saying  that  there  was  danger  of  the  whole  people  ex- 
pecting Jesus  to  return  as  the  Christ.  Therefore  they  came 
together  to  James  and  said,  '  We  beseech  thee,  restrain  the  people, 
since  they  have  erred  concerning  Jesus,  thinking  Him  to  be  the 
Christ.  We  beseech  thee  to  persuade  all  those  that  come  to  the 
feast  of  the  Passover  concerning  Jesus  :  for  to  thee  we  all  give 
heed.  For  both  we  and  all  the  people  bear  thee  witness  that 
thou  art  just  and  acceptest  not  the  person  of  any.  Therefore 
persuade  the  multitude  not  to  err  concerning  Jesus,  for  all  of  us 
give  heed  to  thee.  Stand  therefore  upon  the  pinnacle  of  the 
temple,  that  being  on  high  thou  mayest  be  seen  of  all,  and  thy 
words  may  be  hoard  by  all  the  people.  For  all  our  tribes  to- 
gether with  the  Gentiles  are  come  together  on  account  of  the 
Passover.'  Wherefore  the  aforesaid  scribes  and  Pharisees  set 
James  upon  the  pinnacle  of  the  temple,  and  cried  unto  him  and 
said,  'Thou  .lust  r)ne,  whom  we  ought  all  to  obey,  seeing  that  the 

'  The  MSS.  pivc  Stxaios,  but  it  is  evident  tliat  a  Hebrew  word  is  wanted, 
and  Itouth  after  Fuller  suj^gests  p^'IV. 

-  Oblias  seems  corrupt ;  ^PV  signifies  a  fortified  hill.     Kouth  again  sug- 
gests lifXid/ii,  but  with  less  probability  than  before. 


HEGESIPPUS.  359 

23eople  are  in  error  concerning  Jesus  who  was  crucified,  tell  us 
what  is  the  door  of  Jesus  (or,  who  is  the  door  of  salvation  '  ?).i  And 
he  made  answer  with  a  loud  voice,  '  Why  ask  ye  me  concerning 
Jesus  the  Son  of  Man  ?  even  He  sitteth  in  heaven  at  the  right 
hand  of  the  Great  Power,  and  is  about  to  come  upon  the  clouds 
of  heaven  ! '  And  when  many  were  convinced  and  glorified  God 
for  the  testimony  of  James  and  said,  '  Hosannah  to  the  Son  of 
David  ! '  then  again  the  same  Scribes  and  Pharisees  said  one  to 
another,  '  We  have  ill  done  that  we  have  brought  about  this 
testimony  to  Jesus  :  come  now  let  us  go  up  and  cast  him  down, 
that  they  may  fear  and  believe  him  not.'  And  they  cried  out, 
'  Oh  !  Oh  !  Even  the  Just  is  led  astray.'  And  they  fulfilled  the 
Scripture  \vintten  by  Esaias,  *  Let  us  destroy  the  Just,  for  he  is 
unacceptable  to  us  :  therefore  shall  they  eat  the  fruit  of  their 
works.  - 

"  They  went  up  therefore  and  hurled  down  the  Just,  and  said  one 
to  another,  '  Let  us  stone  James  the  Just.'  And  they  began  to 
stone  him,  forasmuch  as  he  was  not  killed  by  the  fall,  but  turned 
and  sank  upon  his  knees,  saying,  '  I  entreat  Thee,  Lord  God  our 
Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they  do.'  While 
thus  they  were  stoning  him,  one  of  the  priests  of  the  sons  of 
Eechab,  a  son  of  those  Rechabites  to  whom  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
beareth  witness,  cried  aloud  saying,  'Stay!  what  do  ye?  The 
Just  prayeth  for  us.'  And  one  of  them,  a  fuller,  seized  a  wooden 
beam  used  for  pressing  cloth,  and  dashed  it  upon  the  head  of  the 
Just.  So  he  bare  his  witness.  And  they  buried  him  in  a  place 
near  the  temple,  and  his  pillar  remaineth  there  until  this  day. 
This  man  is  become  a  true  witness  to  Jews  and  Greeks  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ.  And  within  no  long  time  Vespasian  laid 
siege  to  them." 

The  second  passage  is  supposed  to  come  from  the  fifth 
book.  It  relates  the  story  of  Domitiau  and  Judas'  grand- 
sons,' to  which  is  added  an  account  of  the  martyrdom  of 
Simeon : — 

"  There  were  yet  remaining  of  the  family  of  the  Lord  the 
grandsons  of  Judas,  who  was  called  the  Lord's  brother  after  the 

1  This  is  very  obscure.  Sonne  think  instead  of  yVJ'*  (Jesus)  n^-lti'* 
(salvation)  should  be  read. 

-  Referring  to  Is.  iii.  lo.  ^  H.  E.  iii.  20. 


360  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

flesh,  a^^'ainst  whom  they  laid  information,^  as  being  of  tlie  seed 
of  David.  These  a  special  ofhcer  -  brought  to  Domitian  ;  for  he, 
like  Herod,  was  afraid  of  the  coming  of  Christ.  And  he  asked 
them  whether  they  were  of  the  family  of  David.  And  they 
admitted  that  they  were.  Then  he  asked  them  what  lands  they 
owned,  and  how  much  money  they  possessed.  And  they  both 
replied  that  they  had  nothing  save  nine  thousand  denarii,  divided 
equally  between  them ;  and  this  sum  was  not  in  ready  money, 
but  was  the  valuation  of  an  estate  of  no  more  than  thirty-nine 
acres,  and  from  it  they  had  to  pay  their  tribute,  and  maintain 
themselves  by  working  it  with  their  own  hands.  They  then 
showed  him  their  hands,  pointing  out  as  evidence  of  their  manual 
labour  the  toughness  of  their  skin,  and  the  horny  excrescences 
on  their  hands  from  continual  handling  of  the  plough.  Then  he 
asked  tliem  about  Christ  and  His  kingdom,  what  it  was,  when 
and  where  it  would  appear  ?  and  they  replied  that  it  was  not 
earthly  or  of  this  world,  Init  heavenly  and  angelic,  and  would 
come  at  the  end  of  the  world,  whensoever  He  should  appear  in 
glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  and  to  reward  every  man 
according  to  his  works.  At  this  Domitian  refused  to  condemn 
them  ;  but  treating  them  with  contempt  as  persons  of  no  account, 
he  let  them  go  free,  and  by  an  edict  stopped  the  persecution 
against  the  Church.  They  then,  being  thus  dismissed,  were 
appointed  to  rule  over  the  churches,  as  being  at  once  martyrs 
and  mem))ers  of  the  family  of  the  Lord.  And  peace  following, 
they  remained  alive  until  the  days  of  Trajan.  .  .  .  They  then 
came  and  presided  over  all  the  Church  as  martyrs,  and  members 
of  the  family  of  the  Lord  ;  and  the  whole  Church  enjoying  pro- 
found peace,  they  remained  till  Trajan  became  emperor,  until  the 
time  came  when  Simeon,  the  son  of  Clopas,  who  was  sprung  from 
the  uncle  of  the  Lord,  being  informed  against  by  the  sectaries,  was 
accused  in  like  manner  on  the  same  charge  before  Atticus  the 
proconsul. 

"For  many  days  he  was  shamefully  entreated,  and  died  a 
martyr's  death,  insomuch  that  all  marvelled,  and  the  proconsul 
al)Ove  all,  to  see  a  man  of  a  hundred  and  twenty  years  endure 
such  things;  and  finally  he  ordered  him  to  be  crucified."-' 

•  iOr]\aT6pcvaai',  a  colloquial  word  from  the  Latin  debitor,  an  informer. 

'^  6  <oi'6/(aToy,  Latin  evocatus,  one  specially  summoned,  after  he  had  earned 
exemption  from  service. 

*  This  fragment  is  quoted  by  Eus.  H.  E.  iii.  32.     It  is  evidently  closely 


HEGESIPPUS.  361 

The  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe  the  homely  tone  of 
simple  piety  which  pervades  these  two  narratives,  and  the 
unadorned  character  of  the  style.  It  should  be  remarked, 
however,  that  in  spite  of  its  circumstantial  details,  doubts 
have  been  thrown  on  the  accuracy  of  his  account  of  S.  James's 
death,  a  very  different  version  of  which  is  given  by  Josephus. 
But  the  passage  of  Josephus  is  not  absolutely  free  from 
suspicion,  and  if  it  were,  fuller  knowledge  might  enable  us 
to  reconcile  the  two  narratives.  At  any  rate,  it  is  difficult 
to  find  a  more  graphic  and  lifelike  picture  in  any  church 
writer.^  It  seems  that  the  work  was  in  existence  so  late  as 
the  sixteenth  century  in  the  library  of  the  convent  of  S.  John 
at  Patmos.  Its  recovery  would  be  one  of  the  most  welcome 
results  of  the  enthusiastic  labour  which  has  been,  and  still 
is,  so  freely  bestowed  on  the  task  of  bringing  to  light  the 
hidden  treasures  of  the  Eastern  convents.  But  though  still 
within  the  range  of  possibility,  the  unearthing  of  so  large 
and  important  a  work  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  probable. 

connected  with  the  former  account.  The  reader  will  not  fail  to  observe 
the  archaic  signification  of  the  word  Mart^-r,  which  includes  those  who 
have  borne  public  testimony  to  Christ,  even  though  not  at  the  price  of 
their  lives. 

1  The  reader  will  notice  one  or  two  unconscious  evidences  of  authenticity 
in  these  fragments,  which  must  carry  weight  with  an  unprejudiced  mind. 
One  is  the  profound  appreciation  of  the  Jewish  character  shown  in  the 
willing  testimony  given  by  the  Pharisees  to  the  righteousness  of  the  man 
whom  nevertheless  they  have  no  scruple  in  stoning  to  death.  The  parallel 
with  their  conduct  towards  our  Lord  and  S.  Stephen  is  obvious.  The  other 
is  the  indication,  not  elsewhere  supplied  and  yet  obviously  authentic,  of 
the  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  Jerusalem  Christians  to  keep  the  episco- 
pate of  their  Church  in  the  hands  of  those  who  were  related  to  Christ 
according  to  the  flesh.  This  throws  light  on  S.  Paul's  declaration  (2  Cor. 
V.  16)  that  he  will  not  know  any  one,  even  Christ  Himself,  after  the  flesh. 
To  the  author  it  appears  that,  if  any  fragments  of  early  Christian  literature 
carry  genuineness  upon  the  face  of  them,  it  is  these  passages  from 
Hegesippus. 


CHAriER  VIII. 

THE  LATER  SCHOOL  OF  S.  JOHX—MELITO  TO 
POLYCRATES. 

In  our  chapters  on  I'apias  and  INjlycaip  we  referred  to  the 
immense  impulse  given  both  to  dogmatic  theology  and  to 
ecclesiastical  organisation  by  the  master-mind  of  S.  John. 
We  shall  see  this  impulse  transferred  later  on  to  the  Western 
world  wlien  we  come  to  treat  of  Irenreus.  Meanwhile,  there 
is  an  interval  in  tlie  Asiatic  Church  before  the  rise  of  Mon- 
tanisni  changed  the  currents  of  theological  thought,  during 
which  the  Johannine  influence  held  undisputed  sway.  During 
this  interval  tlie  great  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  moved  on 
towards  a  more  complete  expression  in  the  writings  of  Melito, 
while  the  observance  of  Easter  according  to  the  traditional 
custom  of  S.  -loliu's  churches  found  an  ardent  champion  in 
Polycrates. 

These  two  Fathers  bear  the  genuine  impress  of  the  apos- 
tolic age,  in  tlie  eminent  holiness  of  their  life,  the  antique 
flavour  of  their  thought,  and  the  lofty  dignity  of  their  con- 
troversial tone.  The  first  to  be  noticed  is  Melito,  Bishop  of 
Sardis,  who  flourished  soon  after  the  middle  of  the  second 
century.  His  reputation  for  holiness  stood  pre-eminent. 
Polycrates  speaks  of  him  as  one  of  the  great  lights^  of  Asia. 
He  lived  a  life  of  rigid  continence,-  after  tlie  example  of  his 
master,''  and  was  remarkable  not  only  for  moral  excellence 
but  for  spiritual  gifts  of  such  eminence  as  to  gain  him  the 
re])utati()n  of  a  propliet."* 


-'  So  should  fvifoi'xos  undoubtedly  be  translated  in  Polycrates'  letter. 
'  The  unanimous  tradition  of  antiquity  represents  S.  John  as  a  virgin. 
*  Thi.s  from  Tertullian  ;  perhaps  not  without  a  side  allusion  to  theMon- 
tanist  claims  to  possess  the  same  gift. 

36-- 


MELITO.  363 

His  long  and  laborious  life  was  involved  in  frequent  con- 
troversies, the  most  important  being  that  on  the  keeping  of 
Easter,  in  which  he  defended  what  was  afterwards  known 
as  the  Quarto-dcciman  practice.  He  was  the  author  of  an 
Apology  addressed  to  M.  Aurelius,  now  lost,  though  a  Syriac 
document  purporting  to  be  a  translation  of  it  exists  in  the 
British  Museum.  The  contents,  however,  do  not  at  all  tally 
with  the  fragments  of  the  Apology  given  by  Euseljius ;  ^  so 
that,  unless  we  suppose  liim  to  have  written  two  Apologies,  it 
is  necessary  to  reject  the  Syriac  one.  The  persecution  under 
stress  of  which  he  wrote  broke  out  about  the  close  of  the 
year  176,  soon  after  Commodus  had  l)een  associated  with 
his  father  in  the  Empire.  Melito's  chief  arguments  for 
toleration  were  (i)  the  innocence  of  the  Christians;  (2)  the 
Emperor's  reputation  for  justice,  which  made  it  incumbent 
on  him  to  hear  their  cause ;  (3)  the  precedents  of  former 
good  emperors,  who  had  favoured  the  Christians,  while  only 
Nero  and  Domitian  had  persecuted  them.  These  argu- 
ments reappear  in  later  apologists,  especially  Tertullian.  The 
Apology  was  almost  if  not  quite  the  last  work  of  Melito. 

The  list  of  his  other  works  proves  him  to  have  been  a 
highly  prolific  writer.  It  is  as  follows  :—(i.)  Two  books 
On  the  Easter  Question,  about  a.d.  165.  (2.)  Exceiyts  from 
the  Old  Testament  in  six  books,  of  which  the  preface  ad- 
dressed to  Onesimus  is  preserved  by  Eusebius.  Its  main 
interest  consists  in  its  enumeration  of  the  canon  of  Scrip- 
ture, from  which  the  Apocrypha  is  omitted.  (3.)  On  {Chris- 
tian) Conversation  and  the  Froj^hets,  a  title  which  one  is 
tempted  to  think  must  have  included  two  separate  trea- 
tises ;  if  otherwise,  the  connection  of  the  two  ideas  seems  to 
point  to  an  anti-Montanist  pamphlet.  (4.)  On  the  Church. 
Tliis  also   may  have   had   for   its   object   the   assertion    of 

1  The  notice  of  Melito  occurs  in  Eus.  H.  E.  iv.  13,  26,  who  enumerates 
most  of  his  writings.  The  titles  are  irepl  rod  iracx^.  iK\oyaL  irepi  TroXirems 
Kal  Trpo^r,T(bv.  irepi  eKK\v<rlas.  wepi  KvpLaKrjs  X670S.  rrepl  cpvaeu^s  dvdpd^Trov.  irepi 
7rX(i(rews.  irepi  viraKorjs  iriarem.  irepi  alae-qTi^pluiv.  irepi  ■>pvxvs  Kai  (Tci/xaros.  irepi 
Xovrpov.  irepi  a\r]deia^.  irepi  Kriaecos  Kai  yevicem  xptcrroO.  irepi  irpo<pr)Teias. 
-Kepi  <t>L\o^epias.  /cXeis.  irepi  roO  8ca^6\ov.  irepi  Ttjs  dwoKa\v^pe(vs  'luiduyov.  irepi 
ivaufidrov  deov. 


364  THE   APOLOGISTS. 

ecclesiastical  autlioiity  against  the  independent  spirit  of  the 
Xcw  Prophecy.  (5.)  On  the  Lord's  Bay.  (6.)  On  the  Nature 
of  Man.  (7.)  On  Creation.  (8.)  On  the  Ohcdicnce  of  Faith. 
(9.)  On  the  Senses.^  (10.)  On  the  Soul  and  Body  and  Mind,- 
an  anthropological  treatise  connected  no  doubt  with  those 
on  human  nature  and  the  senses.  (11.)  On  Baptism.  (12.) 
On  Trutli.  (13.)  On  tlie  Creation  and  Birth  of  Christ.  This 
title  was  liable  to  some  misconception,  owing  to  the  term 
Creation  being  used  of  our  Lord.  It  refers,  however,  to  a 
well-known  text  in  Proverbs,  "  The  Lord  hath  created  Me 
the  beginning  of  His  ways.""  (14.)  On  Frophecy.  This 
may  have  referred  to  the  Montanistic  prophecy,  as  there  is 
reason  to  believe  he  was  engaged  in  combating  it.  (15.)  On 
Hospitality.  (16.)  The  Key.  This  enigmatical  title  is  still 
unexplained.  A  Latin  work,  bearing  the  title  Melitonis 
Claris  Sanctae  Scripturae,  was  published  in  1855  by  Cardinal 
Pitra,  but  was  discovered  to  be  a  mediai'val  compilation  fj-om 
the  Latin  Fathers,  ascribed  to  Melito  without  the  smallest 
ground  of  authority.  (17.)  On  the  Bevil.  (.18.)  On  the 
Revelation  of  S.  John.  Some  think  these  formed  one  work. 
(19.)  O71  the  Embodied  God.  This  would  naturally  be 
considered  a  treatise  on  the  Incarnation,  had  not  Origen, 
in  his  commentary  on  Genesis,  classed  Melito  among  the 
Anthropomorphites,  referring  by  name  to  this  treatise  in 
justification  of  his  censure. "*  The  balance  of  opinion,  however, 
is  decidedly  in  favour  of  Melito's  orthodoxy,  and  of  Origen 
having  inadvertently  misjudged  him. 

All  these  works  Eusebius  says  were  kiK  >\vn  to  him.  Besides 
these,  we  learn  from  Anastasius  that  he  wrote  a  treatise  On 
the  Incarnation,^  directed  against  the  followers  of  Marcion, 

'  The  text  of  Eusebius  {i^ivcs  irepl  vTraKorji  irlareuis  alaOTjTrjplojv,  out  of 
which  it  is  hard  to  extract  any  nicaniiifj^.  The  obvious  correction  of 
inserting  a  trepl  has  been  adopted.     So  Jerome. 

-  The  reading  ^  vo6s  has  been  altered  to  Kal  1*065. 

^  Prov.  viii.  22.  Kvpioi  iKnai  fxc  o.pxv*'  f^^  ob^v  aiTov,  whicli  the  unani- 
mous voice  of  patristic  exegesis  referred  to  Christ. 

■*  Even  if  Melito  had  attributed  body  to  God,  he  would  have  gone  no 
further  than  Tertullian.  Augustine,  however,  blames  Tertullian  for  his 
view.  *  irepl  aapKJ><T(U)i  xP'<^'''o«^- 


MELITO.  365 

and  one  On  the  Passion,  in  which  he  defended  the  use  of 
the  expression, "  God  suffered."  Two  Syriac  fragments,  from 
works  On  the  Cross  and  On  Faith,  are  also  extant.  In  addi- 
tion to  these  genuine  writings,  two  spurious  treatises  were 
ascribed  to  him  in  the  Middle  Ages,  one  On  the  Passion  of 
S.  John,  and  one  0?i  the  Assninption  of  the  Virgin} 

The  main  contribution  of  Melito  to  theology  was  his  al)le 
statement  of  the  double  nature  of  Christ.  The  author  of  the 
"  Little  Labyrinth  "  (about  A.D.  220)  says,  "  Who  knows  not 
the  books  of  Irenseus,  Melito,  and  the  rest,  showing  that 
Christ  is  God  and  Man  ? "  How  thoroughly  Melito  had 
mastered  the  bearings  of  this  fundamental  truth  may  be 
seen  from  two  fragments  translated  by  Lightfoot.^  The  first 
is  from  the  third  book  of  his  treatise  on  the  Incarnation, 
quoted  by  Anastasius  of  Sinai,  and  from  its  great  theological 
importance  we  deem  it  worthy  of  insertion  here  : — 

'•  The  things  done  by  Christ  after  His  baptism,  and  especially 
the  miracles,  showed  His  Godhead  concealed  in  the  flesh,  and 
assm^ed  the  world  of  it.  For  being  perfect  God  and  perfect  man 
at  the  same  time,  He  assured  us  of  His  two  essences — of  His 
Godhead  by  miracles  in  the  three  years  after  His  baptism,  and 
of  His  manhood  in  the  thirty  seasons  before  His  baptism,  during 
which,  owing  to  His  immaturity  as  regards  the  flesh,  He  con- 
cealed the  signs  of  His  Godhead,  although  He  was  true  God  from 
eternity." 

The  other  is  a  Syriac  fragment,  published  by  Pitra  and 
Cureton,  and  is  even  more  remarkable.     It  is  as  follows : — 

"  We  have  made  collections  from  the  Law  and  the  Prophets 
relating  to  those  things  which  are  declared  concerning  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  that  we  might  prove  to  your  love  that  He  is  the 
perfect  Reason,  the  Word  of  God  :  who  was  begotten  before  the 
light,  who  was  Creator  together  with  the  Father,  who  was  the 
fashioner  of  men,  who  was  all  things  in  all,  who  among  the 
patriarchs  was  Patriarch,  who  in  the  law  was  Law,  among  the 

^  The  Latin  title  gives  "  The  Passing  of  Mary,"  De  transitu  B.  V.  M. 
-  E:<says  on  Supernatural  Religion,  No.  vii.  pp.  230-232. 


366  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

priests  Chief-priest,  anioii^'  Iho  kin^s  CloNcrnor,  among  the  pro- 
phets Prophet,  among  tlie  angels  Archangel,  among  voices  the 
Word,  among  spirits  tlie  Spirit,  in  the  Father  the  Son,  in  Ood 
God,  the  King  for  ever  and  ever.  For  this  is  He  Avho  was  pilot 
to  Noah,  who  conducted  Abraham,  who  was  bound  with  Isaac, 
who  was  in  exile  with  Jacob,  who  was  captain  with  Moses,  who 
was  divider  of  the  inheritance  with  Joshua,  who  foretold  His 
own  sulVerings  in  David  and  the  prophets,  who  was  incarnate  in 
the  Virgin,  who  was  born  at  Bethlehem,  who  was  wrapped  in 
swaddling-clothes  in  the  manger,  who  was  seen  of  the  shepherds, 
who  was  glorified  of  the  angels,  who  was  worshipped  by  the 
Magi,  who  was  pointed  out  by  John,  who  gathered  together  the 
Apostles,  who  preached  the  kingdom,  who  healed  the  maimed, 
who  gave  light  to  the  l)lind,  who  raised  the  dead,  who  appeared 
in  the  temple,  who  was  not  believed  on  by  the  peo{>le,  who  was 
Ijetrayed  by  Judas,  who  was  laid  hold  on  by  the  priests,  who  was 
condemned  by  Pilate,  who  was  transfixed  in  the  flesh,  who  was 
hanged  on  the  tree,  who  was  Iniried  in  the  earth,  who  rose  from 
the  dead,  who  appeared  to  the  Apostles,  who  ascended  into 
heaven,  who  sitteth  upon  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  who  is 
the  rest  of  those  that  are  departed,  the  recoverer  of  those  that  are 
lost,  the  light  of  those  that  are  in  darkness,  the  deliverer  of  those 
that  are  captive,  the  guide  of  those  that  have  gone  astray,  the 
refuge  of  the  afHicted,  the  Bridegroom  of  the  Church,  the  Cha- 
rioteer of  the  Cherubim,  the  Captain  of  the  Angels,  (lod  who  is 
of  God,  the  Son  who  is  of  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ,  the  King  for 
ever  and  ever.     Amen." 

Tertullian  is  said  to  have  characterised  ^lelito's  genius  as 
"  elegant  and  dechiniatory,"  ^  and  if  the  above  specimen  be  a 
fair  sample  of  bis  higher  style,-  no  juster  criticism  could  be 
applied.  Though  opposed  to  Melito  on  the  question  of  ( 'Inirch 
discipline,  Tertullian's  own  spirit  had  too  many  points  of  kin- 
ship not  to  recognise  and  respect  a  worthy  antagonist.  The 
work  in  which  he  criticises  Melito  {"  de  IJcstasi,''  in  seven 
books)  has  unfortunately  perished.  It  seems  to  have  been  a 
pleasing  exception  to  his  usual  treatment  of  his  opponents. 

^  S.  Jerome,  dc  \'ir.  Ilhtstr.  xxiv.  p.  93. 

-  There  is  j^ood  ground  for  thinking  that  this  })assage  was  incorporated 
by  Irenanis  in  one  of  his  h)st  treatises,  of  which  a  fragment  in  an  Arme- 
nian version  is  preserved  in  Venice. 


CLAUDIUS  APOLLINARIS.  367 

The  list  of  sul)jects  covered  by  this  Father  shows  him  to 
liave  been  a  man  of  versatile  mind.  His  learning  was  con- 
siderable, including  a  knowledge  of  Syriac,  and  possibly  of 
Hebrew.  His  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament  inclined  to  the 
mystical.  His  rhetorical  brilliancy  caught  the  fancy  of  the 
Western  Church,  and  many  of  his  works  were  translated  into 
Latin.  Hence  his  name,  like  that  of  Hippolytus,  survived 
even  into  the  Middle  Ages,  under  the  forms  Meletius  and 
]\Iellitus,  and,  as  has  already  been  remarked,  two  celebrated 
treatises  gained  currency  under  his  name. 

We  pass  on  to  the  next  prominent  representative  of  the 
school  of  S.  John,  Claudius  Apollinaris,  Bishop  of  Hiera- 
polis,  probably  the  immediate  successor  of  Papias.  Like 
Melito,  he  addressed  an  Apology  to  the  Emperor  M. 
Aurelius,!  which  may  be  assigned  to  the  same  year ;  and, 
like  Melito,  he  wrote  voluminous  works  on  various  con- 
troverted matters.  The  following  titles  have  come  down  to 
us  : — Against  the  Greeks  (five  books) ;  O/i  Truth  (two  books) ; 
Against  the  Jews  (two  books)  ;  Against  the  Montanists ; 
On  Godliness;  On  the  Paschal  Festival;  and  Against  the 
Severiansr  Jerome  is  our  authority  for  attributing  to  this 
Father  a  wide  acquaintance  with  profane  as  well  as  sacred 
letters  :  Photius  praises  his  literary  phraseology  ;  and  the 
variety  of  his  interests  is  shown  by  the  titles  of  his  works. 
Unfortunately  nothing  remains  but  three  meagre  fragments 
of  a  dozen  lines.  In  one  of  them  we  have  the  earliest  extant 
version  of  the  celebrated  story  of  the  Thundering  Legion, 
which  Eusebius  declares  was  regarded  as  a  wonder  by  the 
heathens  themselves,  though  they  did  not  adopt  the  Chris- 
tian explanation  of   it."^     The  incident   of   rain    falling   to 

^  See  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  27,  for  a  short  account  of  this  Father. 

2  A  sect  of  Encratites  or  ascetic  rigorists,  supposed  to  be  the  followers 
of  one  Severus.     But  the  origin  of  the  name  is  doubtful. 

^  Eusebius  gives  Apollinaris  full  credit  for  a  desire  to  state  the  exact 
truth.  Nevertheless  it  seems  undeniable  that  he  has  fallen  into  error. 
The  legion  was  called  already  Fulminca,  not  Fulminatrix  {K€pavvo^6\os)  as 
he  says,  and  was  stationed  at  Melitina,  a  small  town  in  Armenia.  More- 
over, it  is  highly  improbable  that  a  whole  legion  of  Christian  soldiers 
existed  at  this  date. 


368  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

quench  the  soldiers'  thirst,  and  a  thunderstorm  breaking 
upon  tlic  enemy  in  answer  to  tlie  prayer  <jf  a  Christian  legion, 
was  long  believed  in  the  Churcli,  and  considered  t(j  have 
intlucnced  tlie  Emperor's  attitude  towards  it. 

An(»t]ier  writer  of  importance  was  Miltiades,  a  younger 
contemporary  of  tlie  two  preceding.  J^uschius  tells  us  that 
among  otlitr  writings  lie  composed  a  treatise  Against  the 
Greeks,  another  Ayaiast  the  Jews,  as  well  as  an  Ai^olofjTj  ad- 
dressed to  the  "  liulers  of  this  World,"  perhaps  Aurelius  and 
Yerus.  This  was  a  defence  of  Christianity  as  the  true 
philosophy,  and  gained  a  liigh  reputation  for  its  author. 
That  he  took  some  part  in  the  Montanist  controversy  appears 
certain,  Ijut  wliether  for  or  against  the  sectaries  is  more 
doubtful.  Owing  to  an  apparent  confusion  of  names,  Euse- 
bius  seems  at  one  time  to  regard  him  as  a  Montanist,  at 
another  as  an  opponent  of  Montanism.  Possiljly  there  were 
two  men  of  the  same  name.  Another  contemporary  was 
Modestus,  a  rare  instance  of  a  Latin  name  among  tlie  Asiatics. 
He  wrote  against  Marcion  and  Encratism. 

A  little  later,  at  the  close  of  the  century,  we  find  Poly- 
crates,  lUshop  of  Ephesus,  taking  a  prominent  part  in  the 
great  l*aschal  controversy  in  opposition  to  Victor,  the  Roman 
Pontiff.  In  order  to  understand  the  important  fragment  of 
his  Encyclical  Epistle,  preserved  by  Eusebius,  and  given 
further  on,  it  will  be  necessary  to  make  the  reader  acquainted 
with  the  points  in  dispute.  We  have  seen  that  both  Melito 
and  Ai>ollinaris  were  authorities  on  this  question,  and  we 
.sjiall  have  occasion  to  refer  to  it  again  in  the  chapter  on 
Ireuifus.  It  belongs  to  history  rather  than  to  literature ; 
nevertheless,  a  short  summary  may  be  of  interest. 

In  the  Apostolic  Church  there  was  no  thought  of  establish- 
ing annual  festivals.  The  Apostles  themselves  kept  the 
.Jewish  feasts  when  they  could.  And  the  (lentile  Christians 
seem  to  li;i\e  been  contenl  with  llic  wrekly  observance  of 
Sunday,  in  commemoration  of  the  Resurrection;  but,  in 
proc('ss*of  time,  the  inevitable  tendency  towards  "  times  and 
seasons"  asserted  itself,  and  the  Gentile  churches  gradually 
established  an  annual  ecclesiastical  cycle. 


POLYCRATES.  369 

But  although  the  days  of  the  week  on  which  our  Lord 
suffered  and  rose  were  always  observed  by  the  Church,  there 
was  no  trustworthy  tradition  as  to  the  days  of  the  year 
on  which  these  events  occurred.  There  would  obviously, 
therefore,  be  room  for  diversity  of  computations,  if  not  of 
principles  of  observation.  When  the  matter  hrst  comes 
into  clear  light,  we  find  a  difference  of  practice  existing 
between  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  and  those  of  the  West. 
The  former,  following  a  continuous  tradition,  observed  as 
their  annual  festival  the  14th  Nisan,  the  anniversary  of  the 
Jewish  Passover,  as  the  day  on  which  Christ,  the  true  Pass- 
over, was  sacrificed  for  man.  The  latter,  guided  both  by 
opposition  to  Judaic  practices  and  by  the  analogy  of  the 
weekly  Sunday,  observed  not  the  14th  day  of  Nisan,  which 
might  happen  on  any  day  of  the  week,  but  the  Sunday  after 
the  Paschal  full  moon,  keeping  the  previous  Friday  as  the 
anniversary  of  the  Passion.  There  are  three  occasions  on 
which  this  diversity  comes  into  prominence  in  the  second 
century.  The  first  occasion  is  when  Polycarp  visited 
Anicetus  at  Ptome,  and  endeavoured,  though  unsuccessfully, 
to  harmonise  the  two  customs.  His  mission,  however,  was 
not  wholly  fruitless,  since  the  two  bishops  parted  on  friendly 
terms,  each  agreeing  to  observe  his  own  use.  The  second 
occasion  was  circ.  172  A.D.,  at  Laodicea,  when,  owing  to  a 
large  influx  of  various  Christian  bodies  to  celebrate  the 
martyrdom  of  Sagaris,  who  had  suffered  on  the  14th  Nisan, 
the  diversity  of  Easter  usages  excited  attention,  and  produced 
the  controversy  in  which  Melito  and  probably  Apollinaris 
joined.  We  gather  from  the  notices  of  this  controversy  that 
the  Asiatic  bishops  remained  true  to  their  old  custom,  basing 
their  argument  on  the  fact  that  our  Lord  suffered  on  the 
14th,  and  adducing  in  support  of  their  practice  not  merely 
mmemorial  usage,  but  also  the  authority  of  S.  John's  Gospel. 
The  third  occasion  was  in  190  A.D.,  when  Pope  Victor,  con- 
fronted by  an  attempt  to  introduce  the  Asiatic,  or,  as  it  was 
afterwards  called,  the  Quartodeciman  practice  into  Pome,  not 
only  interdicted  it  in  his  own  Church,  but  everywhere  else 
also,  and  excommunicated  those  churches  which  refused  to 

2  A 


370  TIIK  Al'OLOCnSTS. 

conform.     His  despotic  claim  was  resisted  by  Polycrates,  who, 
in  tlie  name  of  the  Asiatic  Synod,  addressed  to  him  a  letter, 

of  which  lMis('l)iiis  has  preserved  the  following  frai^ment : — 

"Wo  therefore  observe  tlie  day  inviolably,  neitlier  adding  to  it 
nor  su])tracting  from  it.  For  in  Asia  repose  great  li<;hts  of  the 
Church,  who  shall  rise  again  on  the  day  of  tlie  Lord's  coming, 
when  He  shall  come  in  glory  from  lieaven,  and  raise  up  all  the 
saints;  as  Philip,  one  of  the  twelve  Apostles,  who  reposes  in 
Jerusalem,  and  his  two  aged  virgin  daughters,  and  liis  other 
daughter  who  lived  in  the  Holy  Spirit  and  rests  at  Ephesus. 
^loreover  John,  who  leaned  upon  the  bosom  of  the  Lord,  who 
became  His  priest,  wearing  the  golden  leaf  of  the  priesthood, 
and  was  both  martyr  and  teacher,  he  also  sleeps  at  Ephesus,  and 
Polycarp  of  Smyina,  bishop  and  martyr,  and  Thraseas  of 
Eumenia,  both  bishop  and  martyr,  who  sleeps  at  Smyrna.  "What 
need  to  mention  Sagaris,  bishop  and  martyr,  who  sleeps  at 
Laodicea,  and  l*apirus  the  blessed,  and  ^Nlelito  the  eunuch,  who 
lived  continuously  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  lies  in  Sardis,  await- 
ing the  visitation  from  heaven,  when  he  shall  rise  from  the  dead  ? 
All  these  kept  Easter  on  the  14th  day  of  the  month.  accordin_:r 
to  the  Gospel,  declining  not  a  whit  therefrom,  but  followin.ij  the 
rule  of  the  faith.  And  now  I,  Polycrates,  who  am  less  tlian  you  all, 
according  to  the  tradition  of  my  kindred,  do  the  same,  havini; 
followed  after  some  of  them.  For  of  my  kinsmen  seven  have 
been  bishops,  and  I  am  the  eighth  ;  and  my  kinsmen  have  ever 
observed  the  day  on  which  the  Jews  ceased  to  eat  leavened 
bread.  Now  I,  })rethren,  have  lived  sixty-five  years  in  the  Lord, 
and  have  held  converse  with  my  brethren  throughout  the  world  ; 
and  having  gone  through  all  the  Scriptures,  I  am  not  to  be 
terrified  by  tliose  who  threaten  us.  For  tlio.se  who  are  gi*eater 
than  I  have  said  that  we  ouglit  to  obey  (Jod  rather  than  man.  1 
might  liave  recounted  the  names  of  those  bishops  wlio  were  pre- 
sent with  me,  whom,  in  accordance  with  your  retpiest,  I  called 
together ;  and  if  I  were  to  mention  all,  they  form  a  very  goodlv 
number.  They  all,  having  seen  me,  a  man  of  no  account,  have 
assent e<l  unto  this  my  epistle,  knowing  that  I  do  not  hear  urey 
hairs  in  \;iin,  but  have  lived  a  consistent  life  in  the  Lord  Je.Mi.s.'" 

'I'lic  language  of  this  letter  is  extremely  interest iiig,  not 
only  from  its  unstudied  dignity,  hut  from  the  occurrence  of 


POLYCRATES.  371 

several  rare  words/  and  from  the  incidental  information  as 
to  the  frequent  attainment  of  episcopal  office  by  members  of 
the  saint's  family.  Some  have  even  thought  that  a  suc- 
cession from  father  to  son  is  implied,  and  no  doubt  this 
could  be  extracted  from  the  Greek ;  but  it  is  hardly  likely 
that  so  striking  a  fact  would  have  been  passed  over  by  all  the 
ecclesiastical  historians ;  and  moreover,  the  phrase,  "sixty-five 
years  in  the  Lord,"  may  imply  that  Poly  crates  was  converted 
in  early  life,  in  which  case  the  theory  would  fall  to  the  ground. 

Weighty  as  this  remonstrance  was,  it  appears  to  have 
produced  no  effect  upon  Victor.  That  able  and  earnest  but 
headstrong  man  persisted  in  his  resolution  to  coerce  the 
Christianity  of  the  world.  Fortunately,  however,  his  tenure 
of  power  was  short,  and  his  successors  allowed  the  question 
to  be  exhaustively  discussed  by  the  leading  authorities  on 
both  sides  for  some  time  longer,  until  the  immense  practical 
advantage  of  enforcing  a  uniform  observance  became  generally 
manifest,  and  the  Council  of  Mc^ea  finally  ratified  Victor's 
view,  and  enjoined  it  upon  the  whole  Church  as  a  condition 
of  orthodox  communion. 

The  history  of  this  celebrated  dispute  brings  to  light  a 
principle  of  the  highest  importance  to  the  student  of  eccle- 
siastical institutions,  namely,  the  different  attitude  assumed 
by  the  Church  towards  apostolic  tradition  when  concerned 
with  matters  of  doctrine,  and  the  same  tradition  when  con- 
cerned with  matters  of  practical  observance.  Xo  church 
was  more  jealous  than  the  Eoman  of  allowing  the  slightest 
deviation  from  what  it  believed  to  have  been  the  teacliing 
of  the  Apostles  in  matters  of  faith.  Even  doctrines  which 
repose  on  the  testimony  of  a  single  Apostle  it  invariably 
assumes  to  represent  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  entire  body, 
and  invests  them  with  the  complete  authority  of  the  sacred 
college.     ISTo  claim  is  ever  made  by  the  Churcli  as  a  wliole, 

^  dpaSiovpyriTos,  uninterfcred  with — aroixe'ia,  luminaries,  a  metaphor  from 
the  Zodiacal  signs  ;  tt^tuXou,  plate  of  gold  leaf — the  meaning,  however, 
is  uncertain,  and  in  any  case  its  sense  is  metaphorical  and  spiritual ; 
evvovxos,  used  metaphoriccvlly  for  a  virgin  ;  irTvpo/jLai,  to  quail,  be  shaken  ; 
dpvv€Lv,  to  put  away,  probably  a  plebeian  expression. 


372  TllK  AFULOc;iSTS. 

still  less  by  the  iioiiuin  ('liuicli,  to  revise  or  alter  <iiiy  por- 
tion of  the  faith  once  deliveied  to  the  saints.  But  in  tlie 
case  of  practical  observances  the  Church  allowed  herself 
greater  latitude.  Slie  claimed  the  right  to  modify,  vary,  and 
adapt  these  according  to  her  own  convenience.  Even  the 
undoubted  practice  of  an  Apostle  was  not  permitted  to  stand 
in  the  way  of  change  wdiere  change  was  imperatively  re(|uired 
for  the  good  of  the  Church.  Nothing  shows  this  more  plainly 
than  the  liistory  of  the  Taschal  controversy.  S.  John's  custom 
of  keeping  Easter  according  to  the  Jewish  calendar  is  as  well 
attested  as  any  other  fact  in  connection  witli  his  life.  Never- 
theless, it  is  made  to  give  way  to  the  paramount  importance 
of  securing?  general  uniformitv,  and  markin^^  off,  in  a  way 
not  to  be  mistaken,  the  Christian  dispensation  from  tlie 
Jewish.  A  parallel  instance  is  found  in  the  gradual  separa- 
tion of  the  Agape,  or  Love-feast,  from  the  service  of  the  Holy 
Eucharist.  In  the  practice  of  the  Apostles  there  can  be 
little  doubt  that  the  two  ceremonies  were  conil)ined.  Never- 
theless, tlie  recpiirements  of  church  organisation  and  of  purity 
of  worship  manifestly  demanded  that  they  should  be  kept 
separate.  Accordingly,  we  find  that  by  the  end  of  the  second 
century  their  separation  was  completely  efi'ected,  and  those 
small  connnunities  which  still  combined  them  were  held  to 
be  schismatic  or  lierctical. 

To  dilate  on  the  bearings  of  this  principle  would  obviously 
be  to  exceed  the  limits  of  our  subject.  But  we  have  thought 
it  well  to  draw  tlie  reader's  attention  to  it,  not  only  on  his- 
torical and  theological  grounds,  but  more  especially  in  order 
to  point  out  the  combination  of  free  organising  intelligence 
with  definite  intellectual  limitations  which  is  so  remarkable 
a  feature  in  tlu^  develo])ment  of  Anle-Nicene  Christianity. 
It  is  this  vigorous  and  healthy  spontaneity  of  movement 
which  fc^Mus  the  chief  contrast  between  the  Church  of  the 
first  three  centuries  and  the  systematised  centralisation  of 
the  ages  that  follow. 

In  this  chapter  we  have  carried  our  account  of  the  Asiatic 
school  to  the  end  of  tlu;  second  century,  from  motives  of  con- 
venience, forestalling  to  some  extent  the  chronological  order. 


POLYCRATES.  373 

Most  of  these  writers,  as  well  as  others  of  whom  we  know 
not  even  the  names,  were  ardently  engaged  in  stemming  the 
tide  of  heretical  speculation  which  inundated  Asia  like  a 
flood.  From  Papias  onwards.  Gnostics,  Encratites,  Ophites, 
Marcionites  and  Montanists  disturbed  the  Church's  peace, 
often  with  keen  intellectual  subtlety  and  often  with  strong 
moral  enthusiasm.  They  were  confronted  with  equal  ability 
and  even  greater  enthusiasm  by  these  lettered  and  states- 
manlike prelates,  who  combined  a  deep  and  often  mystic 
piety  with  strong  good  sense  and  astonishing  practical  vigour. 
The  loss  of  all  their  works  except  a  few  pitiful  fragments  is 
truly  deplorable.  It  may  be  compared  with  the  similar  loss 
in  the  sphere  of  profane  literature  of  the  ante-classical  poets 
and  orators  of  Home,  whose  more  finished  successors  by  no 
means  fill  the  void  their  absence  creates.  So  it  is  with  these 
grand  originators  of  the  ecclesiastical  Corpus  Theologice. 
M.  Eenan  in  his  "  Marc  Aurele  "  ^  has  paid  a  just  tribute  to 
their  greatness ;  and  with  his  striking  estimate  of  them  we 
shall  conclude  our  notice  :  "  A  crowd  of  books  (he  says)  was 
produced  on  all  sides.  I^ever,  perhaps,  has  Christianity 
been  more  prolific  of  literature  than  during  the  second  cen- 
tury in  Asia.  Literary  culture  was  universally  spread 
abroad  in  that  province :  the  art  of  composition  was  well 
understood,  and  Christianity  profited  by  it.  The  patristic 
Church  literature  now  began.  The  ages  that  followed  did 
not  surpass  these  earliest  essays  of  Christian  eloquence :  but 
from  the  point  of  view  of  later  orthodoxy  the  works  of  these 
early  Fathers  offered  more  than  one  stumbling-block.  The 
study  of  them  was  regarded  with  suspicion ;  they  were  less 
and  less  transcribed,  and  so  nearly  all  these  beautiful  writ- 
ings disappeared  to  make  room  for  the  Christian  classics 
subsequent  to  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  writers  whose  doctrine 
was  more  correct,  but  whose  general  character  was  inferior 
in  originality  to  those  of  the  second  century." 

^  Page  192. 


ClJAl'TKi;   IX. 

IREN.EUS  {A.D.   125-203?). 

L\  the  history  of  Cliristiaii  (l(jctrine  it  is  not  the  most  pro- 
found and  original  thinkers  that  always  oecupy  the  foremost 
place.  On  the  contrary,  the  Church  has  often  found  her 
most  useful  champions  among  minds  of  the  receptive  rather 
tlian  the  creative  order,  slow  of  movement,  but  unyielding 
and  tenacious,  and  able  to  apply  the  rigid  test  of  orthodoxy 
with  impartial  logic  to  all  deviations  from  the  rule  of  faith. 
We  need  not  be  surprised  at  this.  For  the  revelation  of  the 
Christian  idea  may  be  regarded  in  two  different  ways.  It 
may  be  regarded  as  a  pregnant  germ  of  truth,  destined  to 
expand  with  the  growtli  of  humanity,  and  therefore  needing 
restatement  from  time  to  time,  and  readjustment  to  each 
successive  phase  of  thouglit.  Or  it  may  be  regarded  as  an 
inviolaljle  deposit  committed  once  for  all  to  the  custody  of 
the  Church,  ui)on  whom  is  laid  the  duty  of  transmitting  it 
from  age  to  age,  unchanged  and  uncontaminated  by  the  pro- 
cesses of  the  secular  intelligence.  This  latter  point  of  view 
is  at  once  the  simpler,  tlie  easier,  and  the  more  congenial  to 
the  average  of  mankind.  AVe  see  signs  of  it  already  in  the 
Xew  Testamenl  in  ilie  Tastoral  Epistles,  and  afterwards  in 
the  sub-Apostolic  Fatliers.  But  the  most  conspicuous  in- 
/  stance  of  it  in  tlie  Ante-Xicene  Church  is  to  be  found  in 
Irenseus.  Tu  liim  belongs  tlie  distinction  of  stereotyping 
the  genius  of  ortliodoxy  and  foumling  the  Church's  polemic 
method.  In  an  age  when  wild  s})eculations  were  in  the  air, 
he  adheres  unwaveringly  to  the  ai»ostolic  tradition,  enticed 
from  the  safe  patli  neitlier  by  the  dancing  lights  of  Gnos- 
ticism, nor  by  the  steadier  llnme  of  Cireek  philosophic 
ihoii^ht. 


IREN/EUS.  375 

This  great  Father,  the  bent  of  whose  iiiiiid  was  practical 
rather  than  literary,  but  whose  writings  are  of  inestimable 
value  to  the  student  of  Church  history  and  doctrine,  belonged 
by  race  and  education  to  the  Eastern  world.  The  date  of 
Ids  birth  is  uncertain.  Lightfoot  places  it  about  A.D.  120; 
Lipsius,  with  more  probability,  some  ten  years  later.  He 
was  certainly  a  native  of  Asia  Minor,  and,  very  possibly,  of 
Smyrna.  Of  his  parentage  we  have  no  information,  but  one 
would  incline  to  believe  he  was  born  in  a  Christian  home 
and  in  a  certain  position  of  life.  His  education  was  evidently 
a  careful  one.  It  comprised  some  considerable  acquaintance 
with  poetry  and  philosophy,  as  well  as  the  usual  course  of 
rhetoric  and  dialectic ;  but  heathen  philosophy  obtained  no 
such  hold  on  him  as  it  obtained  on  Justin,  nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  did  it  inspire  him  with  that  fierce  repulsion  which 
Hashes  forth  in  the  arguments  of  Tatian  and  Tertullian. 

His  name  signifies  the  Peaceful,  and  in  the  spirit  of  an  Old 
Testament  saint  he  accepted  it  as  an  omen  for  the  guidance 
of  his  life.     Gentle  but  firm,  persuasive  rather  than  imperious,  , 
he  ever  used  his  great  authority  on  the  side  of  moderation  ' 
and  peace.     As  an  opponent  of  heresy  he  is  uncompromis-       y^ 
ing,  but  not  uncharitable.     He  strives  to  describe  without 
misrepresenting  views  which  he  does  not  understand,  and 
as  he  had  access  to  and  used  the  best  available  sources,  his 
statements  are  accepted  w^itli  confidence  by  writers  of  every 
school.    The  influences  that  surrounded  his  early  years  were 
peculiarly  fitted  to  form  his  genius  in  that  mould  of  rigid 
faith,  combined  with  large-hearted  wisdom,  which  makes  him 
resemble  our  own  Hooker,  pre-eminently  the  Judicious. 

The  churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  first  half  of  the  second 
century  marched  in  the  van  of  Christendom.  In  d(^ctrine 
and  organisation  alike  they  took  the  lead.  Their  missionary 
activity  was  great ;  their  literary  productiveness  remarkal)le. 
The  prolonged  life  and  unifiue  authority  of  S.  Jolm  had 
resulted  in  the  growth  of  a  school  of  theology,  whicli  num- 
bered in  its  ranks  many  eminent  writers,  (^f  whom  unhappily 
but  scanty  fragments  survive. 

Of    this    school    rolycarj)  was    unquestionably    the    most 


376  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

distinguished  member.  His  ivj;c,  charaeler  ami  ()])puiiuiii- 
ties  stamped  him  as  pre-eminently  the  exponent  of  apostolic 
tradition.  IJis  lectures  were  largely  attended.  The  authority 
cf  his  opinions  was  emphasised  l)y  the  impressiveness  of 
his  manner.  IrencTus,  then  in  the  first  bloom  of  early  man- 
hood, was  among  his  attentive  hsteners.  His  congenial 
spirit  was  profoundly  impressed  by  the  master's  steadfast- 
ness of  faith  and  pious  horror  of  free  thought.  In  later  life, 
amid  the  cares  of  the  episcopate  in  a  far  distant  region  of  the 
world,  he  recalls  with  animation  the  memories  of  that  golden 
time.  In  a  letter  addressed  to  Florinus,  an  old  comrade 
who  had  lapsed  into  heresy,  he  touches  a  chord  to  which  he 
expects  his  correspondent  to  vibrate : — 

"  I  saw  thee,  Floriuus,  when  I  was  still  a  boy  in  Lower  Asia, 
in  company  with  Poly  carp,  when  thou  wast  faring  prosperously 
in  the  royal  court,  and  endeavouring  to  stand  well  with  him. 
For  I  distinctly  remember  tlie  incidents  of  that  time  better  than 
events  of  recent  occurrence;  for  the  lessons  received  in  childhood, 
;,'rowing  with  the  growth  of  the  soul,  became  identified  with  it  : 
so  that  I  can  describe  the  very  place  in  which  the  blessed  Poly- 
carp  used  to  sit  while  he  discoursed,  and  his  goings  out  and  his 
comings  in,  and  his  manner  of  life,  and  his  personal  appearance, 
and  the  discourses  which  he  held  before  the  people ;  and  how  he 
would  descrilje  his  intercourse  with  John  and  with  the  rest  who 
had  seen  the  Lord,  and  how  he  would  relate  their  words  ;  and 
whatsoever  thin^js  he  had  heard  from  them  about  the  Lord,  and 
al)out  His  miracles,  and  about  His  teaching,  Polycarp,  as  having 
received  them  from  eye-witnesses  of  the  life  of  the  Word,  would 
relate  altof^ether  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures.  .  .  .  To 
these  discourses  I  used  to  listen  at  the  time  with  attention  l)y 
<iod*s  mercy  which  was  bestowed  on  me,  noting  them  down  not 
on  paper  but  in  my  heart,  and  by  the  fji-ace  of  God  I  constantly 
ruminate  upon  them  faithfully.  And  I  can  testify  in  the  sight 
of  (lod,  that  if  the  ble.ssed  and  apostolic  elder  had  heard  anytliiiii; 
of  this  kind  he  would  have  cried  out,  and  st()]>ped  ins  ears,  and 
said  after  liis  wont,  *0  good  God  (u  xaXs  O  i),  for  what  times  hast 
Thou  kept  me,  that  I  should  endure  such  things?'  and  wou]«l 
even  have  fled  from  the  place  where  he  was  sitting  or  stan(hng 
wlicn  he  heard  such  words.      And  indeed  i\n<  can  he  shown  t'lom 


IREN/EUS.  377 

his  letters  which  he  wrote  either  to  the  neighbouring  churches  for 
their  confirmation,  or  to  certain  of  the  brethren  for  their  warning 
and  exhortation."  ^ 

True  to  this  picture  of  himself,  Irena^us  seems  never 
happier  than  when,  at  the  close  of  some  difficult  argument,  he 
can  enforce  his  conclusion  by  appealing  to  the  authority  of 
Polycarp,  and  the  other  "elders,  disciples  of  the  Apostles, 
better  men  than  myself,"  with  whom  he  had  been  privileged 
to  converse,  and  many  precious  fragments  of  whose  teaching 
he  has  preserved. 

The  talents  educated  in  Smyrna  were  destined  for  exercise  ^ 
in  a  widely  different  field.  The  inhabitants  of  Gaul  had 
received  their  Christianity,  as  formerly  their  civilisation, 
from  Asia  j\Iinor.  A  close  intercourse  was  maintained  be- 
tween the  churches  of  the  two  countries,  and  more  than  one 
custom  drawn  from  Eastern  use  was  retained  in  Gaul  not- 
withstanding; the  dominant  influence  of  Rome.  Iremeus  was 
sent  to  work  as  a  presbyter  in  southern  Ciaul,  we  know  not 
by  whom  or  in  what  year.  It  is  (|uite  possilJe  that  he  may 
have  previously  spent  some  years  in  Home.  There  is  a  frag- 
ment in  the  Moscow  MS.  of  the  martyrdom  of  Polycarp, 
which  states  that  at  the  date  of  that  event  Irenseus  was 
teaching  in  Eome,  and  that  at  the  precise  moment  when  the 
martyr's  soul  fled  he  heard  a  voice  like  the  blast  of  a  trumpet 
saying,  "  Polycarp  has  borne  witness."  Lipsius  thinks  it 
possil  tie  that  the  fragment  is  from  some  lost  work  of  Irenanis 
himself,  but  this,  of  course,  is  quite  uncertain.  So  far  as  it 
goes,  however,  it  makes  for  his  Poman  sojourn,  Now  the 
death  of  Polycarp  t(jok  place  in  a.d.  155;  and  Iremeus  was 
chosen  Bishop  of  Lyons  in  177  or  178,  after  a  residence, 
probaljly,  of  some  few  years.  We  have  thus  a  consideral)le 
interval,  during  which  it  is  likely  that  Irenii'us  paid  more 
than  one  visit  to  the  capital,  and  found  in  its  dogmatic  sur- 
roundings a  fit  sphere  for  maturing  liis  theological  views. 
For  while  lie  retains  many  characteristics  of  the  Eastern 
school,  such  as  the  Logos  doctrine,  reverence  for  the  elders, 

^  The  translation  is  from  Liixlitfoot. 


378  THE  AI'OLO(;iSTS. 

and  ji  distinct  Cliiliastic  theory,  lie  shows  cmmi  nioic  striking 
traces  of  Western  and,  specially,  of  lionian  intluence.  His 
conception  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  a  Unity  founded  on 
doctrine  and  secured  by  the  universal  Episcopate  ;  his  lofty 
estimate  of  IJonie  as  the  chief  centre  of  genuine  Catholic 
tradition ;  his  extreme  disapproval  of  schism,  his  mistrust 
of  speculation,  his  predominantly  legal  and  yjractical  concep- 
tion of  the  Christian  covenant :  though  they  may  all  be 
partly  illustrated  from  Asiatic  writers,  are  just  those  char- 
acteristics of  the  Western  Church  which  grew  stronger  with 
time,  and  finally  found  their  fullest  expression  in  Kome.  In 
spite,  therefore,  of  the  insufficiency  of  evidence,  it  may  be 
considered  highly  probal)le  that  between  his  departure  from 
Smyrna  and  arrival  in  Gaul,  Ireuiiius  spent  some  time  at 
Ivome,  sufficient  to  study  and  thoroughly  to  appreciate  the 
leading  tendencies  of  Eoman  Christianity. 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century  the  churches  of 
Oaul  were  governed  by  Pothinus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  himself 
doubtless  an  Asiatic,  and  possibly  in  his  boyhood  a  hearer 
of  S.  John.  Under  him  Irena3us  fulfilled  the  duties  of  a 
presbyter,  until  the  great  persecution  under  Marcus  xVurelius 
swept  over  the  district  (a.d.  177).  Among  its  martyrs  was 
the  lUshop,  who  had  reached  the  patriarclial  age  of  ninety.  At 
his  death  the  eyes  of  the  Church  were  turned  upon  Irenanis, 
whose  infiuence  is  traceable  in  the  Letter  of  the  Gallican 
Confessors,!  of  which  many  think  he  was  the  author,  and 
who  was  entrusted  with  the  conveyance  of  it  to  IJome.  He 
was  also  commissioned  to  intercede  with  Pope  Eleutherus 
on  behalf  of  the  Montanists  of  Asia  Elinor,  with  some  of 
whose  views  he  himself  was  inclined  to  sympathise.  Koman 
(Jatholic  divines  suggest  a  further  object  of  liis  visit  to  Kome, 
viz.,  that  he  might  obtain  Episcopal  consecration.  On  tliis 
l)oint,  however,  we  have  no  direct  evidence. 

The  P>ishop  of  Lyons,  if  not  the  sole  bisho[)  of  the  Gallican 
churches,  was  at  any  rate  their  chief  officer.  During  the 
time  Irena-us  held  the  Sec,  he  was  much  occupied  with 
resisting  the  spread  of  heresy,  especially  Gnosticism  in  what 


IRENyEUS.  379 

is  known  as  its  Western  form,  which  seems  to  have  exercised 
an  extraordinary  fascination  over  the  Celtic  mind,  principally 
through  the  teachhig  of  Ptolemajus.^  The  bishop's  earnest- 
ness is  proved  by  his  sparing  time  from  those  administrative 
and  missionary  labours  in  which  he  delighted,  to  write  a 
controversial  treatise,  a  task  for  which  he  had  no  natural 
inclination.  Besides  superintending  his  own  extensive 
diocese,  we  find  him  taking  an  interest  in  the  affairs  of  the 
Church  at  large,  and  generally  with  effect.  He  remon- 
strated with  Florin  us  on  his  errors,  and,  failing  to  convince 
him,  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  Bome,  to  put  him  on  his  guard 
against  his  heretical  presbyter.  During  the  Quartodeci- 
man  controversy,  which  at  Eome  was  complicated  by  its 
connection  with  the  Montanism  of  Blastus,  he  intervened  in 
two  directions.  He  addressed  to  Blastus  a  pamphlet  entitled 
Oil  Schism,  pointing  out  to  him  the  insubordination  of  his 
conduct.  At  the  same  time  he  wrote  also  to  Victor,  who 
had  taken  occasion  by  the  troubles  of  his  own  church  to 
endeavour  to  force  the  Western  rule  for  Easter  upon  the 
whole  Catholic  Church  on  pain  of  excommunication.  This 
autocratic  action  had  been  met  by  a  temperate  but  firm 
opposition  on  the  part  of  the  Asiatic  churches,  who  had 
made  Polycrates  their  spokesman.  The  situation  was 
serious,  and  Ireuieus,  as  the  friend  of  both  parties,  addressed 
to  Victor  a  weighty  and  statesmanlike  document,  pointing 
out  the  importance  of  maintaining  union,  and  of  allowing 
diversity  of  practice  on  all  matters  that  did  not  touch  the 
essentials  of  the  faith.  This  letter  came  with  all  the  better 
grace  from  Iremuus,  since  his  own  practice  agreed  with 
Victor's.  But  the  authority  of  the  greatest  living  Church- 
man, backed  by  the  unanimous  approval  of  his  diocese,  had 
no  effect  upon  the  headstrong  Pope.  A  considerable  frag- 
ment of  this  letter  is  preserved  by  Eusebius  in  the  fifth  book 
of  his  history.  The  reader  may  be  glad  to  have  a  quotation 
from  it,  exemplifying  as  it  does  the  wisdom  and  moderation 
of  this  truly  holy  man  : — 

^  See  page  221. 


380  Tin:   APOLOC;iSTS. 

'•  For  tho  controversy  is  not  only  as  to  tlie  day  (of  keeping 
Easter),  but  as  to  the  mode  of  fasting  (previous  to  it).  Some 
think  a  single  day's  fast  sufficient,  others  keep  two  days,  others 
a  longer  period.  Some  reckon  the  fast  day  to  be  a  period  of 
forty  consecutive  hours  of  day  and  night.  Such  is  the  diversity 
of  practice  :  and  this  of  no  modern  date,  but  long  anterior  to  our 
times,  our  predecessors  having  perhaps  shown  some  remissness 
in  administration,  so  that  what  to  them  was  a  spontaneous 
custom  has  hardened  into  a  rule  with  their  successors.  Still  none 
the  less  did  they  one  and  all  keep  at  peace  with  each  other,  and 
we  too  do  the  same.  And  the  diversity  in  keeping  the  fast 
cements  the  concord  of  faith." 

The  letter  then  proceeds  in  dignified  language  to  point 
out  that  Victor's  predecessors  had  not  thought  it  necessary 
to  break  off  their  Christian  fellowship  with  other  churches 
on  account  of  such  differences,  and  cites  in  particular  the 
example  of  Anicetus  allowing  Polycarp  to  celebrate  the 
Eucharist  in  his  cathedral  during  a  friendly  conference  upon 
this  very  ])oint. 

Happy  the  connnunities  whose  spiritual  charge  was  en- 
trusted to  such  a  bishop !  We  can  easily  understand  that 
their  gnjwtli  was  steady  and  prosperous.  Scarcely  any 
trustworthy  notices  are  preserved  of  the  later  years  of 
Irena'us.  The  date  of  his  death  is  usually  placed  in  A.D. 
202  or  203,  on  the  supposition  thai  he  sufl'ered  martyrdom 
under  Severus,  but  the  fact  of  this  martyrdom  is  extremely 
doulttful.  luisebius  does  not  mention  it,  nor  does  Jerome 
in  his  catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  where  he  is  follow- 
ing the  authority  of  Eusebius.  He  alludes  to  it  in  one  of 
his  later  commentaries  in  a  passing  reference,  and  it  is 
repeated  by  subsequent  autliors;  but  i)robability  inclines 
to  the  supposition  that  the  bishop  was  allowed  to  end  liis 
days  in  peace,  after  a  most  successful  e]usco]iate  of  about  a 
quarter  of  a  century. 


His  Writings. 

This    truly    eminent    man    was   not   primarily   or   i)rotes- 
sionally    an    ;iuthor.      He    himself    tells    us    this.       At    the 


IRENyEUS.  381 

commencement  of  his  great  work  he  apologises  to  the  friend 
at  whose  request  he  wrote  for  his  imperfect  command  of  the 
resources  of  style,  and  implies  that  the  daily  use  of  a  bar- 
barous dialect  had  disqualified  him  for  literary  excellence. 
But  as  a  rule  we  find  that  when  men  of  real  capacity  set 
themselves  to  write  on  a  subject  of  which  they  are  masters, 
they  rarely  lack  the  power  of  expression.  And  this  is  the 
case  with  Irenieus.  He  possesses  several  qualifications  for  a 
good  theological  writer.  First  of  all,  he  has  a  firm  grasp  of 
his  own  principles,  and  is  not  diverted  from  them  by  any 
subtlety  of  argument  or  haziness  of  definition.  Secondly, 
he  has  an  acute  polemical  method,  dry,  no  doubt,  and  dispu- 
tatious, but  forcible  enough  and  no  way  deficient  in  clear- 
ness. He  is  inferior  in  the  higher  scholarship  to  Clement, 
and  to  Justin  in  philosophic  breadth.  Of  the  historic  and 
metaphysical  imagination  which  sheds  such  a  glow  over  the 
pages  of  Origen,  he  has  not  a  trace.  His  mind  is  essentially 
prosaic.  His  long  and  wearisome  discussions  are  rarely 
enlivened  by  any  brilliant  remarks,  and  his  liveliest  weapon 
of  offence  is  a  somewhat  pedantic  pleasantry.^  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  he  has  all  the  advantages  of  a  matter-of-fact 
temperament.  His  orthodoxy  is  all  but  unimpeached,  a  rare 
thing  among  Ante-Mcene  Fathers.  The  single  exception  to 
this  is  not  one  that  touches  any  vital  doctrine.  It  is  a  defect 
which  he  shares  in  common  with  nearly  all  his  predecessors 
from  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  namely,  the  belief  in  the 
speedy  return  of  Christ  to  earth.  This  Ijelief  was  especially 
distasteful  to  the  theologians  of  the  fourth  century,  from  its 
tendency  to  obscure  the  conception  of  the  visible  Church  as 
Christ's  earthly  kingdom.  Irenjuus  undoubtedly  allowed 
himself  to  be  infiuenced  by  the  somewhat  sensuous  views 
that  prevailed  in  the  Church  of  his  birth.  And  it  may  occa- 
sion some  surprise  to  the  reader,  who  has  struggled  through 
the  knotty  arguments  of  the  iirst  four  books,  to  encounter  in 
the  fifth  a  plane  of  thought  so  dillerent  from  wliat  has  gone 

^  As  where  he  suddenly  exclaims,  lod,  lov,  and  (pev  (peO  ;  or  where  he 
parodies  the  cosmogony  of  the  Valentinians  by  the  "  cucurbitogony " 
of  a  gourd. 


)^ 


382  TH1-:   APOLOGISTS. 

before.  Tu  his  case  as  in  tliat  of  TertuUian,  to  whose  temper 
sucli  views  were  far  more  congenial,  the  retention  of  this 
pious  anticipation  is  due  to  reverence  for  jintiquity,  and  in 
particular  to  the  influences  of  his  youthful  days.  It  has 
been  used  to  invalidate  the  critical  judgment  of  Irenicus  on 
other  matters,  but  most  unjustly.  It  is  a  genuine  though 
a  transitory  portion  of  the  apostolic  tradition,  and  is  quite 
compatiltle  with  a  clear  apprehension  of  the  theological  and 
philosoi)hical  standpoint  of  the  sects  against  wliom  lie 
argues. 

Ikit  to  the  modern  critic  his  value  after  all  is  more  historical 
than  doctrinal.  He  is  our  main  authority  for  the  leading 
tenets  of  Gnosticism,  and  more  particularly  of  Valentinus. 
And  the  progress  of  criticism  has  tended  to  establish  the 
substantial  trustworthiness  of  his  account  of  his  opponent's 
views  as  well  as  of  primitive  catholic  tradition.  There  is 
indeed  no  writer  before  Euseljius  so  distinguished  for  accu- 
racy of  information,  or  so  free  from  a  jJrioi'i  views.  That  he 
did  not  clearly  discern  tlie  fundamental  principle  of  Gnosti- 
cism as  an  attempt  to  express  Christianity  in  terms  of  pure 
thought,  is  merely  to  say  that  he  did  not  live  in  our  own 
day.  Hi[)polytus  was  his  superior  in  erudition  and  Clement 
in  scholarship :  but  Irena^us  stands  above  them  both  in  the 
definiteness  of  his  descriptions,  and  the  cogency  of  his  pole- 
mical results. 

The  great  work  on  which  his  fame  rests  is  the  Refutation  of 
Gnosticism^  in  five  books,  which  exists  entire  only  in  a  Latin 
version,  the  Greek  original,  with  the  exception  of  Bk.  i. 
chaps.  i.-xxi.,and  several  shorter  fragments,  having  perislu'd. 
The  translation  was  prol)ably  made  in  CJaul,  and  is  certainly 
of  very  early  date,  since  it  was  used  by  TertuUian.  From 
a  literary  point  of  view  it  is  wortldess,  l)eing  absurdly  literal, 
and  ])arbarous  in  its  Latinity  ;  Imt,  as  has  been  often  observed, 
this  rugged  fidelity  gives  it  all  tlie  liiglier  value,  for  it  is 
quite  possible  in  m;iny  ])la('('s  to  reconstruct  the  CJi-tM'k  fnmi 

'  'K\e7xo$  f^o-^  dvarpovT]  t^s  ypevdiovvfiov  yvil}<reo)$.  Mentioned  in  Eusebius 
H.  E.  V.  7  and  elsewhere.  The  book  is  commonly  styled  irpin  aipi<T€is, 
Contra  hairtscs. 


IRExN^US.  383 

the  Hellenised  Latin,  and  sometimes  when  a  knowledge  of 
the  Greek  term  is  important.  Fragments  of  a  Syriac  version 
are  also  preserved,  the  date  of  which  is  not  determined ;  but 
it  is  in  close  accord  with  the  Latin. 

The  Refoitation  was  composed  in  Gaul.  From  internal 
evidence  we  infer  that  it  was  written  after  Ireneeus  had 
become  bishop,  and  that  its  composition  extended  over 
several  years.  Lipsius  assigns  the  five  years  from  a.d.  180- 
185  as  the  probable  period  of  authorship.  Much  discussion 
has  arisen  on  the  various  indications  of  chronology  that  occur 
in  the  work,  and  the  reader  who  is  desirous  of  studying  the  y 
arguments  is  referred  to  the  admirable  article  on  Irena3us  in 
Smith's  "  Biographical  Dictionary."  The  general  plan  of  this 
masterpiece  of  controversy  is  as  follows  : — 

Book  L — After  a  prefatory  chapter  on  the  attractiveness 
of  heretical  ideas  and  a  modest  disclaimer  of  any  special  con- 
troversial aptitude,  he  plunges  at  once  into  a  description  of 
the  system  of  Valentinus,  which,  as  the  most  widely  spread, 
the  most  representative,  and  the  most  popular  of  all,  forms 
the  chief  object  of  his  attack,  and  in  refuting  which  he  con- 
siders that  he  virtually  refutes  the  rest.  He  points  out  the 
chief  features  in  which  it  differs  from  the  orthodox  faith, 
first  in  its  dualism,  most  fatal  error  of  all ;  secondly,  in  its 
fantastic  and  arbitrary  interpretation  of  Scripture,  to  which, 
indeed,  it  professes  to  appeal,  but  without  paying  regard 
to  the  true  sense  of  the  Inspired  Word ;  thirdly,  in  its  incon- 
sistent moral  practice,  as  to  which  he  particularly  notes 
the  custom  of  requiring  money  for  the  communication  of 
its  mysteries  ;  and  fourthly,  in  its  antithesis  between  the 
spiritual  and  the  hylic  natures,  with  its  double  set  of 
doctrines  adapted  for  each.  He  compares  its  treatment 
of  Scripture  to  the  patchwork  poems  strung  together  out 
of  unconnected  verses  of  Homer,  and  passed  upon  the  un- 
learned reader  as  genuine  selections  from  tlie  poet. 

He  then  points  out  the  unstal)le  character  of  the  doctrine, 
and  the  ever-increasing  grandiloquence  of  its  successive  pro- 
fessors, ridiculing  their  attempts  to  improve  upon  each  other's 
terminology.     From  Yalenliniis  he  passes  on  to  his  disciples, 


384  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

Secundus,  Epiphiines,^  PtolemtL'Us  (whose  opinions  had  a  \vi<U' 
viiivj^a  ill  G;iul),C*^l"'i'^''i'^^i^j«ii^<^  Marcus.  To  the  last-niL'nti<»n(.'d 
he  devotes  a  consideral  ih'  space,  more,  one  would  imagine,  than 
his  importance  warranted  ;  hut  no  douht  Irena-us  was  the  hest 
judge  of  the  rehative  strength  of  the  systems  he  attacked. 
To  us  it  seems  incredilile  tliat  sucli  a  tissue  of  chicanery 
and  liondiast  couhl  liave  imposed  upon  any  person  of  sense, 
llis  mysterious  theories  about  properties  of  numhers  and 
the  letters  of  the  alphabet,  and  other  occult  results  of  a 
pseudo-scientific  method,  are  refuted  with  a  patient  fulness 
which  is  rarely  betrayed  into  ex})ressions  of  anger  or  disdain. 
These  are  reserved  for  the  moral  side  of  the  man's  teaching, 
which,  by  its  use  of  magic  formulas  and  exciting  ceremonial, 
produced  the  most  disastrous  results  on  female  virtue.  The 
career  of  Marcus,  as  depicted  by  Irenitus,  is  entirely  that  of 
the  successful  impostor,  and  his  doctrines  are  evidence,  not 
so  much  of  his  beliefs,  as  of  the  credulity  of  tlu^  ])ublic.- 

The  third  portion  of  the  book  is  occupied  with  tracing  the 
springs  of  Yalentinian  error  to  their  sources.  It  contains  a 
very  interesting  account  of  Simon  ]\Iagus,  the  Father  of 
heresy,  in  which  this  remarkable  statement  is  found  :  "  Simon 
declares  that  he  is  to  be  adored  as  God  ;  tliat  he  has  appeared 
to  tlie  Jews  as  the  Son,  to  the  Samaritans  as  the  Father,  and 
to  the  Gentiles  as  the  Holy  Ghost."  ^  If  this  quotation  be 
authentic,  as  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt,  it  testifies  to  the  very 
early  currency  of  the  Trinitarian  formula,  and  of  a  Xoetian  or 
Sabellian  interpretation  of  it.^  The  successor  and  disciple  of 
Simon  was  Menander,  who  again  was  followed  by  Saturninus 
or  Saturnilus,  and  he  by  liasilides,  whom  Irena?us  thus 
directly  connects  with  the  school  of  Simon.  It  appears, 
however,  that  the  i)hilosophy  (»f  tliis  heretic  was  somewhat 

'  III  tli(r  Latin  wo  (iiul  alius  rem  t/in'dam,  tjni  <t  clunis  tst  ma'/i.stcr 
{psoriim,  i.e.,  d'SXos  5^  tu  6s  kuI  (TrKpavTjs  5i5d<r/caXos  aiTwv.  The  opinions  of 
scholars  arc  diviflcd  as  to  whether  iiri<pavr]s  is  to  be  taken  as  a  proper 
name  or  not.  'J'o  leave  a  leading  writer  with  whose  tenets  he  was  familiar 
without  a  name  is  hardly  consistent  with  the  careful  practice  of  Ircnajus. 
But  sec  note,  p.  226. 

^  For  further  details  about  l^Lircus,  cf.  ]ip.  iio;i.,  220. 

^  I.  23.  ■•  Sec  pp.  195  and  251. 


IREN^US.  385 

imperfectly  known  to  him.  At  any  rate,  he  seems  to  con- 
found the  doctrines  of  the  master  with  the  depraved  and 
distorted  form  in  which  they  were  held  by  the  later  Basili- 
deans.  An  account  is  then  given  of  Carpocrates  and  his  sect ; 
then  of  Cerinthus  and  the  Ebionites,  whom  we  are  a  little 
surprised  to  see  in  such  company ;  next,  of  Cerdo  and  his 
pupil  Marcion,  Tatian  and  the  Encratites ;  and  finally,  of  the 
Ophites,  Cainites,  and  Nicolaitans. 

Book  II. — In  this  book  the  waiter  braces  himself  for  a 
hand-to-hand  grapple  with  Valentinianism.  In  a  long  and 
difficult  series  of  arguments  he  proves  his  skill  in  dialectic, 
vindicates  the  consistency  of  the  Church's  teaching,  and  ex- 
poses many  of  the  weak  points  of  his  adversary.  Some  able 
general  remarks  occur  in  the  course  of  the  controversy.  For 
example,  at  the  end  of  the  tenth  chapter  we  read  as  follows : 
"  To  say  that  matter  was  formed  out  of  the  thought  (cntliy- 
mesis)  of  a  wandering  JEon  (Soplda),  and  to  separate  the 
^on  from  her  thought,  and  to  conceive  of  the  affections  and 
properties  of  the  thought  apart  from  the  matter  (in  which 
they  are  manifested),  is  incredible  and  inconsistent."  Here 
we  have,  seized  with  incomparable  clearness,  the  fundamental 
fallacy  of  the  Gnostic  method,  viz.,  the  hypostatising  of  attri- 
butes. Had  IrenaBus  worked  out  this  line  of  thought  instead 
of  merely  indicating  it,  his  Refutation  would  have  been  less 
tedious  and  not  less  convincing.  Again,  in  the  fourteenth 
chapter  he  compares  the  Gnostic  mythology  with  that  of  the 
comic  poet  Antiphanes  in  his  "  Birth  of  Aphrodite ; "  with 
those  of  Homer  and  Hesiod ;  with  the  cosmogonical  theories 
of  Thales  and  his  successors :  and  shows  that  there  is  not  a 
single  original  feature  in  the  whole.  He  also  points  out  its 
essentially  Pagan  character,  and  its  entire  inability  to  appre- 
hend tlie  revealed  God.  Another  profound  remark,  in  which 
for  a  moment  he  seems  to  anticipate  the  modern  point  of 
view,  occurs  in  ch.  xxviii.-xxx.,  where  he  accuses  the  Gnostics 
of  making  man  the  measure  of  the  universe,  and  attempting  f 
to  transcend  the  limits  of  human  knowledge,  forgetting  that  ' 
God  alone  is  omniscient,  and  that  beyond  the  realm  of  \ 
the  knowable  lies  that  of  Divine  revelation.     In  all  these 

2  B 


386  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

arguments  we  recognise  the  voice  of  the  true  critic.  It  is 
true  they  are  not  pursued  to  their  legitimate  results,  and  are 
sometimes  counteracted  by  tlie  display  of  tlie  very  tendencies 
wliich  they  condemn;  l)ut,  judging  broadly  of  his  contro- 
versial method,  it  is  hard  to  deny  to  it  the  virtues  of  fair- 
ness of  statement  and  keen  logical  power,  unspoilt,  as  is  too 
often  the  case,  by  exaggeration  or  amljitious  rhetoric. 

Book  III. — Having  dealt  with  tlie  metaphysical  aspects 
of  the  Gnostic  doctrine,  he  now  proceeds  to  refute  it  by  the 
testimony  of  Holy  Scripture.  In  this  department,  as  in  so 
many  others,  he  is  not  only  the  first  l)ut  the  greatest  and 
most  explicit  of  all  the  early  controversialists.  Xearly  all 
who  follow  are  indebted  to  him,  if  not  for  their  actual  argu- 
ments, at  any  rate  for  the  great  principles  on  which  these 
are  founded.  He  opens  with  the  question,  "What  are  the 
sources  of  Christian  truth  ? "  and  answers,  "  The  teaching  of 
Christ  and  His  Apostles,  as  handed  down  first  by  word  of 
mouth  and  then  by  authoritative  written  documents."  He 
proves  this  by  showing  the  unbroken  continuity  of  apostolic 
tradition,  and  more  particularly,  l)y  vindicating  the  unique 
authority  of  the  four  Gospels.  His  celebrated  argument 
for  the  existence  of  this  number,  neither  more  nor  less, 
is  an  instance  of  a  j^^ori  reasoning  which  is  indeed  un- 
convincing to  us,  but  in  which  allowance  should  be  made 
for  the  bias  of  a  reverential  mind  which  delights  to  trace 
analogies  in  wh[it  it  regards  as  the  phenomena  of  Divine 
action.  The  reader  will  no  doubt  be  glad  to  have  the  passage 
m  cxtcnso}     It  is  as  follows  : — 

"  For  as  there  are  four  quarters  of  tlie  world  in  which  we  live, 
as  there  are  also  four  universal  winds,  and  as  the  Church  is 
scattered  over  all  the  earth,  and  the  (lospel  is  the  pillar  and  l)ase 
of  the  Church,  and  the  breath  (or  spirit)  of  life,  it  is  likely  that 
it  shoidd  have  four  pillars  breathing  immortality  on  e\orv  side 
and  kindlinf]^  afresh  the  life  of  men.  Whence  it  is  evident  that 
the  Word,  th(>  Architect  of  all  things,  who  sitteth  npon  the  Cheru- 
hini  and  holdetii  all  things  together,  havini;  been  made  manifest 

>  Adv.  liar.  iii.  II,  S.     Sanday's  translation. 


IREN^US.  387 

unto  men,  gave  us  the  Gospel  in  a  fourfold  shape,  but  held  together 
by  one  Spirit.  As  David,  entreating  for  His  presence,  saith :  Thou 
that  sittest  upon  the  Cherubim,  show  Thyself.  For  the  Cherubim 
are  of  fourfold  visage,  and  their  visages  are  symbols  of  the  dis- 
pensation (economy)  of  the  Son  of  Man.  .  .  .  And  the  Gospels 
therefore  agree  with  them,  over  which  presideth  Jesus  Christ." 

But  while  thus  vindicating  the  exclusive  authority  of 
the  four  Gospels,  as  against  the  reception  of  uncanonical 
Gospels  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  mutilation  or  rejection  of 
the  existing  ones  on  the  other,  he  is  no  less  careful  to  assign 
due  weight  to  the  judgment  of  the  Universal  Church.  The 
Church  is  regarded  by  him  as  the  authorised  custodian  and 
interpreter  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  if  any  doubt  arises  as 
to  where  the  right  of  interpretation  rests,  he  refers  to  the 
historic  apostolic  churches,  and  particularly  to  that  of  Eome, 
as  the  authentic  repositories  of  the  true  tradition.  Into  the 
theological  aspect  of  this  argument  it  is  beside  our  purpose 
to  enter.  It  is  sufficient  to  point  out  its  great  importance 
in  a  historical  and  literary  sense.  The  mind  which  could 
clearly  grasp  and  state  for  all  time  an  intellectual  principle 
so  far-reaching  in  its  effects  upon  the  human  race,  must  be 
credited  with  no  ordinary  power  of  generalisation,  and  no 
small  philosophic  grasp.  It  is  perhaps  the  greatest  contri- 
bution TreucX'US  has  made  to  the  armoury  of  the  Church. 

Book  IV. — In  this  long  and  interesting  book  the  same 
suljject  is  pursued,  chiefly  with  reference  to  the  contention 
of  ]\Iarcion  that  Christ  came  to  reveal  a  new  and  hitherto 
unknown  God.  It  supplies  an  able  vindication  of  the  iden- 
tity of  origin  of  the  Law  and  the  Gospel,  as  both  coming 
from  the  same  God,  and  of  the  development  of  the  Christian 
Covenant  from  the  Mosaic.  Incidentally,  it  treats  of  many 
questions  of  the  highest  importance  to  theology  and  Church 
history,  such  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the  nature  of 
the  eucharistic  sacrifice,  the  universality  of  redemption,  the 
origin  of  evil,  the  freedom  of  the  will,  the  Christology  of  the 
Old  Testament,  the  value  of  apostolic  succession,  and  so  fortli. 
It  is  on  the  whole  the  most  varied  and  important  of  the  five 
books,  and  should  be  carefully  studied  by  those  who  desire 


388  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

to  understand  the  theological  equipment  of  the  Ante-Xicenc 
Church.  The  writer  sums  up  the  issue  between  himself  and 
the  Gnostics  in  the  following  pithy  sentence :  "  The  true 
Gliosis  is  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles  and  the  ancient 
system  of  the  Church  throughout  the  world."  ^  To  him 
theology  is  not  speculation  ;  it  is  the  analysis  and  combina- 
tion of  principles  given  from  without. 

Book  V. — The  last  book  begins  with  a  promise  to  supply 
proofs  of  his  arguments  from  the  words  of  Christ  and  His 
Apostles.  It  is  rather  loosely  connected  with  the  preceding, 
and  may  well  have  been  written  somewhat  later.  Its  chief 
theme  is  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  which  is  a  distinc- 
tive tenet  of  Christianity  in  opposition  to  spiritualistic  and 
metaphysical  beliefs  about  the  soul.  Iren?eus'  treatment  of 
this  subject  is,  in  accordance  with  his  promise  at  the  out- 
set, strictly  Scriptural  and  ecclesiastical,  not  speculative  or 
mystical.  No  doubt  his  interpretation  of  Scripture  has 
many  weak  points,  and  some  of  his  analogies  are  strained 
and  fanciful,-  but  there  can  be  no  question  that  he  appreci- 
ates and  defines  accurately  the  true  Catholic  doctrine. 

A  special  interest  centres  round  the  concluding  chapters. 
The  topic  of  the  resurrection  naturally  suggests  that  of  man's 
final  destiny  and  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  Irenreus,  as 
mentioned  before,  favours  what  are  known  as  ^lillenarian  ^ 
views.  Following  the  traditions  of  l^apias,  and  other  vener- 
able members  of  the  Asiatic  Church,  he  looks  for  the  return 
of  Clirist  to  earth,  to  reign  for  a  thousand  years  with  I  lis 
saints,  during  which  period  creation  shall  renew  its  youth, 
and  the  beatitudes  of  the  Old  Testament  shall  mingle  har- 
moniously with  those  of  the  New.  The  coming  of  Antichrist 
will  precede  that  of  his  Conqueror  and  Judge.  The  ioru.>i 
classicus  on  this  mysterious  subject  is  the  passage  of  tlic 
Apocalypse  in  wliich  the  numl)cr  of  the  Beast  is  given,  and 

'  7j/tD<rts  0X77^7)5  ij  tCjv  dvooToXuv  oioax')  fcal  t6  dpxo.^oi'  T?}y  iKKXyjaias 
avcrTrjfxa  Kara  iravrbi  rov  k6<ti.lov.  —  Lib.  iv.  cap.  33,  §  8. 

^  E.g.,  his  idea  that  Salvation  by  Wood,  i.e.y  the  Cross,  is  prcfiijiircd  by 
the  miracle  of  Elisha  in  makin<r  the  axe-head  fo  swim.  Cf.  the  old  inter- 
polation, "  Doniiniis  re<]:navit  a  lii/no"     Sec  page  335. 

■■'  More  strictly,  those  known  as  Pre-millenarian.     Sec  page  107. 


IREN/EUS.  389 

declared  to  be  the  number  of  a  man.  Ireniuus  mentions 
several  solutions  of  the  problem,  between  whose  claims  he 
does  not  care  to  decide,  prudently  remarking  that  the  matter 
was  not  intended  to  be  clearly  revealed.^ 

On  the  subject  of  eternal  punishment,  his  statement  of 
the  doctrine  is  as  thoughtfully  and  tenderly  expressed  as 
perhaps  any  that  has  been  put  forward.  The  passage  is  an 
excellent  example  of  his  restrained  and  reverent  expression, 
so  markedly  in  contrast  to  the  highly-coloured  and  vin- 
dictive strains  of  Tertullian  :  - — 

"  Whatsoever  things  preserve  friendship  with  God,  to  them  He 
giveth  participation  in  Himself,  in  other  words,  life  and  light, 
and  enjoyment  of  good  things.  But  upon  those  who  in  their 
hearts  revolt  from  God,  He  bringeth  separation  from  Himself. 
Now,  separation  from  God  is  death,  and  separation  from  light  is 
darkness,  and  separation  from  God  is  loss  of  all  His  good  things. 
Those,  therefore,  w'ho  by  their  revolt  have  forfeited  the  aforesaid 
tilings,  being  deprived  of  all  good  things,  are  of  necessity  ^  in 
every  kind  of  punishment.  Not  that  God  primarily  punishes, 
but  that  that  punishment  ensues  on  their  deprivation  of  all  good 
things.  Now,  good  things  from  God  are  eternal  and  endless  : 
therefore  the  deprivation  of  them  is  also  eternal  and  endless ; 
just  as  light  being  continuous,  those  who  have  blinded  them- 
selves, or  have  been  blinded  by  others,  ai'e  continuously  deprived 
of  the  enjoyment  of  the  light,  wdthout  its  being  implied  that 
lifjlif  brings  upon  them  the  penalty  of  blindness." 

From  this  necessarily  brief  analysis  of  his  one  treatise  that 
has  survived,  the  reader  will  easily  appreciate  the  immense 
importance  of  Iren^eus  as  a  Christian  writer.  His  leading 
characteristics  are,  on  the  one  hand,  thoroughness  of  ap- 
prehension ;  on  the  other,  accuracy  of  representation  and 
temperance  of  expression.  Unlike  Justin  and  Clement,  he  is 
deficient  in  sympathy  towards  those  from  wlioin  l)o  tliflers; 

^  Tlic  Solutions  given  are  'E,v6.vda$,  Aareti/os,  TetTdc.  (Titus  ?)  It  seems 
that  he  inclined  towards  the  last.  It  does  not  seem  to  have  occurred  to 
him  that  the  true  key  must  be  sought  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet. 

-  Lib.  v.  cap.  27,  §  2.     Compare  p.  581. 

^  KaTOL-ylyvovTaL. 


390  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

unlike  Origt'ii,  lie  lacks  the  many-sidedness  of  view  which 
charms  even  in  its  inconsistencies.  But  he  is  superior  to 
all  of  them  in  his  clear  grasp  of  the  essentials  of  Catholic 
doctrine,  and  in  the  steadfast  maintenance,  through  a  long 
and  difficult  argument,  of  the  principles  with  which  he  starts  ; 
wliile  he  excels  Tertullian  still  more  conspicuously  in  the 
fairness  of  his  judgments  and  the  charitable  temper  of  his 
mind.  The  high  praise  that  Lightfoot  bestows  on  one  por- 
tion of  his  research  may  justly  be  extended  to  the  whole : 
"  Any  one "  (he  says)  "  who  will  take  the  pains  to  read 
Irena3us  through  carefully,  endeavouring  to  enter  into  his 
historical  position  in  all  its  bearings,  striving  to  realise  what 
he  and  his  contemporaries  actually  thought  about  the  writ- 
ings of  the  New  Testament,  and  what  grounds  they  had  for 
thinking  it,  and,  above  all,  resisting  the  temptation  to  read 
in  modern  theories  between  the  lines,  will  be  in  a  more 
favourable  position  for  judging  rightly  of  the  early  history 
of  the  canon,  than  if  he  had  studied  all  the  monographs 
which  have  issued  from  the  German  press  for  the  last  half- 
century."  1 

Influence  of  his  Character  and  Genius. 

The  estimation  in  which  his  writings  were  held  is  suffi- 
ciently proved  l)y  the  use  made  of  them.  Hippolytus  and 
Tertullian,  themselves  original  investigators,  are  content, 
when  travelling  over  the  same  ground  as  Irena3us,  to  rest  on 
his  authority,  and  often  to  reproduce  his  words.  At  a  later 
date  Cyprian,  and,  later  still,  Epiphanius  and  Theodoret, 
drew  largely  from  his  vast  stores  of  information.  Clement 
is  an  independent  authority,  but  he  too  shows  great  respect 
for  Irenacus. 

This  eminence  was  secured  by  what  in  a  historian  is  the 
highest  of  all  qualities,  accuracy  of  information  and  care- 
fulness of  statement.  It  is  clear  that  Irenoeus  drew  from 
original  sources.  The  memoirs  of  Valentinus  and  his  dis- 
ciples, and  the  writings  of  Ttolemaius  and  his  immediate 
'  Essays  on  Supernatural  Religion,  No.  iv.  p.  141. 


IREN^US.  39^ 

followers,  are  referred  to  by  him.  Moreover,  the  very  cir- 
cumstantial notices  of  Marcus  are  evidently  from  first-hand 
observation.  Lipsius  is  of  opinion  that,  in  addition  to  the 
heretical  works  themselves,  Iren^eus  availed  himself  of  various 
trustworthy  controversial  writings,  such  as  those  of  the 
Asiatic  presbyters,"^  and  the  Syntagma  of  Justin,  the  latter 
with  especial  reference  to  the  views  of  Marcion.  We  are 
indebted  to  Eusebius  for  an  appreciative  account  of  the  life 
and  writings  of  Irena3us,  from  whom  he  quotes  no  less  than 
thirty-one  passages.  His  prejudice  against  the  bishop's 
Chiliastic  views  does  not  prevent  him  doing  full  justice  to 
the  qualities  of  his  mind  and  character. 

Besides  his  great  work,  Iren^eus  was  the  author  of  several 
other  writings,  of  which  only  a  few  fragments  have  come 
down  to  us. 

He  himself  announces  his  intention  of  combating  the 
views  of  Marcion  in  a  separate  treatise ;  but  it  is  uncertain 
whether  this  intention  was  ever  carried  into  effect. 

His  Epistle  to  Elorinus,  quoted  above,  is  partly  preserved 
by  Eusebius.  Its  fuller  title  was  Co7icerninrj  Monarchy,  i.e., 
that  God  is  not  the  author  of  evil:^  Whether  this  implies,  as 
Lightfoot  thinks,  a  Gnostic  theory  of  the  Demiurge,  or,  as 
Massuet  thinks,  the  still  more  anti-Christian  view  of  the 
Supreme  God  as  the  author  of  evil,  cannot  now  be  determined. 
The  date  of  this  work  is  disputed,  but  it  was  probably  sub- 
sequent to  that  on  heresies.^  It  was  followed  shortly  after 
by  another  treatise,  On  the  Ogdoad,  which  certainly  must 
have  been  directed  against  Gnostic  error;  from  this  Eusebius 
quotes  with  approval  the  concluding  words,  which  strikingly 
indicate  the  writer's  sense  of  the  paramount  importance  of 
avoiding  all  misrepresentation  in  controversial  matters,  and 
imply  a  not  ill-founded  anxiety  lest  ignorant  or  would-be 

1  See  back,  p.  i  lo.  These  included  Tolycarp,  Papias,  and  the  unnamed 
"elders,  companions  of  the  Apostles." 

2  Eus.  V.  20.     Trepl  fMOPapxi-as  ^  irepl  tov  /xrj  ehai  rbu  Qebv  TroirjTriv  KaKuiv. 

3  Lightfoot  thinks  the  letter  to  Florinus  was  among  his  earliest  works  ; 
but  it  seems  so  closely  connected  with  that  on  the  Ogdoad,  that  it  is  safer 
to  regard  them  as  nearly  synchronous. 


392  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

orthodox   lranscii])ers  should  deal   unfairly   with    his   own 
text  :— 

"  I  adjure  thee,  wlioever  thou  art,  that  transcril)e.st  this  hook, 
by  our  Lord  Jesus  Clirist,  and  by  His  <(racious  appearance,  when 
lie  shall  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  to  compare  what 
thou  hast  copied,  and  to  correct  it  by  this  original  manuscript, 
from  wliich  thou  hast  carefully  transcribed.  And  tliat  thou  also 
transcii])e  this  adjuration,  an<l  insert  it  in  the  copy." 

The  letter  to  Victor,  and  that  On  Schism  addressed  to 
Blastus,  have  been  already  referred  to.  Euseljius  also  men- 
tions treatises  Ayainst  the  Greeks  (or  On  Knoidcdge),  and  On 
A2Wstolic  Preaching,^  treatise  On  Various  Discussions}  whicli 
is  supposed  to  have  been  a  collection  of  homilies  on  various 
texts  of  Scripture,  and  one  On  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  Besides 
these,  four  Greek  fragments  were  discovered  by  l*faff  at 
Turin  in  17 15.  The  first  treats  of  the  true  knowledge; 
the  second  is  on  the  Eucharist ;  the  tliird,  on  the  duty  of 
toleration  in  subordinate  matters  of  difference,  with  reference 
to  the  Paschal  controversies ;  the  fourth,  on  the  object  of 
the  Incarnation.  Their  genuineness  has  been  much  dis- 
puted;  but  the  third  is  almost  certainly  from  a  work  of 
Iremuus. 

The  iniluence  of  Irenieus  on  Christian  thought  has  not 
been  so  much  personal  as  theological.  It  is  quite  possible 
that  this  was  his  own  direct  intention.  His  disclaimer  of 
literary  excellence  in  the  preface  is  not  borne  out  by  the 
scfpu'l.  It  is  more  i)robable  that  he  designedly  suppressed 
all  display  of  style.  If  the  Letter  of  the  Galilean  Churches 
be  his  work,  as  is  very  probable,  he  possessed  high  powers 
of  pathetic  writing.  I>ut,  like  Bisho})  lUitler,  he  seems 
lo  have  studiously  eliminated  all  expressions  of  feeling, 
and  all  individual  characteristics,  from  a  treatise  in  which  he 
intended  to  embody  the  results  of  severe  argument  and  the 
inqx-rsonal  conclusions  of  the  Catholic  reason.  If  this  was 
his    puii>osL',   lie   has    been    amply   justified    Ity   the   result. 


IREN.EUS.  393 

Lightfoot  truly  says  that  on  all  the  most  important  points 
of  theology  this  father  conforms  to  the  standard  that  has 
satisfied  the  Church  ever  since. 


APPENDIX. 

THE   LETTER   OF   THE   GALLICAN   CHURCHES. 

Before  closing  this  chapter,  a  brief  notice  must  be  given  of 
this  celebrated  letter.^  We  have  remarked  that  Irenaeus,  as 
yet  a  presbyter,  was  chosen  to  carry  it  to  Eome,  and  that 
several  scholars  have  conjectured  that  he  was  the  author  of 
it.  The  supposition  is  probable  enough  in  itself;  for  the 
suppression  of  the  writer's  name  is  in  accordance  with  the 
ancient  custom  observed  in  the  Epistles  of  Clement  and 
Barnabas.  Eusebius,  it  is  true,  says  nothing  about  Irena3us 
being  the  author,  and  his  silence  must  undoubtedly  be 
allowed  great  weight.  Eouth's  argument  against  assigning 
it  to  him  is  taken  from  considerations  of  style.  Irenaeus 
emphatically  disclaims  all  practice  in  the  rhetorical  art ;  and 
this  denial  is  thought  to  l)e  incompatible  with  the  high 
degree  of  literary  pathos  to  which  the  letter  attains.  But 
we  must  remember,  first,  that  Iremeus'  disclaimer  has  to  be 
taken  with  considerable  reservation,  and  secondly,  that  the 
undoubted  literary  effect  of  the  letter  arises  from  its  artless 
simplicity  and  transparent  earnestness,  not  from  any  aesthetic 
c|ualifications,  to  which  it  makes  no  pretension  whatever.  Its 
plain  prosaic  narrative,  recounting  the  most  supreme  triumphs 
of  faith  without  any  apparent  consciousness  of  their  pre- 
eminent character,  reveals  the  very  type  of  mind  that 
afterwards  grappled  in  the  same  thorough  unhesitating 
manner  with  the  multifarious  aberrations  of  heresy.  In 
default  of  external  evidence  we  strongly  incline,  from  the 
powerful  personality  that  looms  in  the  background  of  the 
letter,  to  ascribe  it  to  Irenieus.  Whoever  was  the  author, 
it  is  beyond  all  question  one  of  the  most  precious  heirlooms 
which  has  come  down  to  us  from  Christian  antiquity.     All 

^  Preserved  almost  in  its  entirety  by  Eusebius,  H.  E.  v.  cc.  1-4. 


394  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

classes  of  critics  have  united  to  commend  it ;  the  sober 
llouth,  the  fastidious  and  sceptical  Renan,  the  warm-hearted 
and  susceptible  Archdeacon  Farrar.  It  is  impossible  for 
any  man  or  woman  with  a  heart  in  their  breast  to  read  it 
without  being  moved.  The  Christian  blesses  God,  as  he 
reads,  for  the  glorious  testimony  it  affords  to  the  power  of 
the  Saviour  he  loves,  and  the  Agnostic  wonders  as  he  feels 
the  spell  of  an  enthusiasm  which  he  deems  irrational,  but 
whose  unearthly  grandeur  he  cannot  deny.  We  feel  that  no 
mere  literary  criticism  will  give  an  adequate  idea  of  the 
simple  majesty  of  this  true  story,  and  therefore  we  have 
thought  well  to  give  the  reader  a  literal  translation  of  all 
that  Eusebius  has  preserved,  that  he  may  judge  of  its 
qualities  for  himself : — 

Tlie  Letter  of  the  Gallican  CJmrclies,  containing  an  account  of  the 
Martyrdoms  at   Vitnne  and  Lyons  under  Marcus  Aurelius^ 

A.D.    177. 

*'  The  servants  of  Christ  wlio  sojourn  in  Vienna  and  Lugdunum 
to  the  brethren  in  Asia  and  Phrygia,  wlio  have  Hke  faitlf  and  hope 
of  redemption  with  us  :  Peace,  grace  and  glory  from  God  our 
Father  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

"  We  cannot  woi-thily  recount,  nor  is  it  possible  in  writing  to 
describe  the  greatness  of  our  late  persecution,  the  wrath  of  the 
lieathen  against  the  saints  and  all  that  the  blessed  martyrs  en- 
dured. For  the  adversary  rushed  upon  us  with  all  his  strength, 
giving  us  a  foretaste  of  his  coming  that  will  soon  be  without  fear  : 
and  he  rehearsed  all  his  part,  practising  and  training  his  ser- 
vants against  the  servants  of  God  :  so  that  we  were  not  merely  kept 
out  of  the  houses,  haths  and  market,  but  actually  forbidden  to 
show  ourselves  in  any  place  whatever. 

"But  we  on  our  side  were  led  to  battle  by  the  grace  of  God, 
which  siived  the  weak,  and  raisetl  up  firm  pillars,  strong  through 
patience,  to  draw  to  themselves  all  tlie  violence  of  the  wicked 
one.  These  withstood  him  to  the  face,  enduring  every  kind  of 
reproach  and  punishment.  These  made  light  of  great  things  in 
their  haste  to  join  Christ,  truly  proving  that  the  sufferings  of  the 
j)resent  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory  that 
shall  be  revealed.  And  in  the  first  place  they  bravely  bore  all 
that  the  multitude  when  they  met  together  with  one  accord  put 


IREN^US.  395 

upon  them ;  revilings  and  beatings  and  draggings  and  plunder- 
ings  and  stonings  and  imprisonments :  and  all  else  that  is  wont 
to  be  done  by  an  infuriated  mob  to  those  it  believes  to  be  its 
enemies.  At  last,  being  brought  into  the  market-place  by  the 
tribune  and  chief  men  of  the  city,  and  being  questioned  and  con- 
fessing before  the  whole  populace,  they  were  confined  in  prison  to 
await  the  coming  of  the  governor. 

"  On  his  arrival  they  were  brought  before  him,  and  treated 
with  signal  harshness.  Then  one  of  their  number,  Vettius  Epa- 
gathus  by  name,  a  man  filled  with  the  fulness  of  love  to  God  and 
his  neighbour,  whose  path  was  so  direct  that  young  as  he  was  he 
equalled  the  testimony  of  the  aged  Zacharias,  '  that  he  walked 
in  all  the  statutes  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  blameless'  and 
was  forward  in  every  act  of  kindness  to  his  neighbour :  zealous 
moreover  for  God  and  fervent  in  spirit : — Being  such  a  one,  he 
brooked  not  the  unjust  judgment  pronounced  against  us,  but 
grieved  sore  and  claimed  to  be  heard  in  the  brethren's  defence, 
saying  he  could  prove  there  was  no  godlessness  or  impiety  amongst 
us.  But  the  nobles  on  the  platform,  to  whose  class  he  himself 
belonged,  shouted  to  him  to  stop ;  while  the  governor  refused  to 
accept  his  just  plea  for  speech,  and  merely  inquired  if  he  was  a 
Christian.  He  replied  with  a  clear  voice  that  he  was  :  and  was 
at  once  removed  into  the  company  of  the  martyrs,  having  won 
the  title  of  'the  Christians'  advocate.'  Indeed  he  had  the  Advo- 
cate within  him,  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  greater  measure  than  Zacha- 
rias, as  he  showed  by  the  fulness  of  his  love,  having  rejoiced  for 
the  sake  of  defending  his  brethren  to  lay  down  his  own  life.  He 
was,  yea  he  is,  a  true  disciple  of  Christ,  one  that  follows  the  Lamb 
whithersoever  He  goeth. 

"Then  indeed  the  rest  were  divided.  For  the  protomartyrs 
were  ready  and  to  the  front,  who  with  all  willingness  filled  up 
the  confession  of  their  witness.  And  the  unready  and  untrained 
were  made  manifest,  yea  and  the  weak  also,  who  could  not  bear  the 
tension  of  this  great  conflict.  Of  these,  ten  in  all  fell  away,  who 
also  caused  us  great  grief  and  unbounded  sorrow,  and  hindered 
the  alacrity  of  the  rest,  who  though  not  themselves  arrested,  yet, 
filled  with  sympathy,  were  present  with  the  martyrs  and  never 
left  their  side. 

"■  Then  were  we  all  greatly  troubled  from  doubtfulness  as  to 
their  confession,  not  dreading  the  punishments,  but  looking  to- 
wards the  end,  and  fearing  lest  any  might  fall  away.     However, 


396  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

each  (lay  tliose  wlio  were  worthy  wei'c  arrested,  and  these  filled 
the  others'  places,  so  that  all  the  best  of  the  two  churches, 
those  by  whom  their  state  had  been  established,  were  gathered 
into  one.  They  arrested  also  certain  heathen  slaves  of  the 
Christians,  for  the  governor  had  ordered  tliat  we  should  all  be 
searched  for.  These  men,  by  the  lying  in  wait  of  Satan,  through 
dread  of  the  torments  which  they  saw  inflicted  on  the  Christians, 
and  with  which  they  themselves  were  threatened,  falsely  accused 
us  of  banqueting  on  human  flesh,  of  incestuous  intercourse,  and 
other  things  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  us  even  to  speak  or  think 
of,  nor  even  to  believe  that  such  things  ever  happen  among  men. 
On  this  information  being  extracted,  the  multitude  were  lilled 
with  rage  against  us ;  so  that  even  those  who  had  from  the  ties 
of  kinship  dealt  more  gently  at  lirst,  were  now  rent  with  savage 
anger.  Then  was  fulfilled  that  which  was  spoken  by  the  Lord, 
'  The  time  cometh  when  every  one  that  killeth  you  will  think 
that  he  doeth  God  service.' 

"  After  this  the  holy  martyrs  endured  punishments  past  all 
recounting,  Satan  desiring  above  all  things  to  force  them  to 
blaspheme.  And  above  all  the  rest  did  the  governor  and  the 
people  and  the  soldiers  vent  their  fury  upon  the  Viennese  deacon 
Sanctus,  and  upon  Maturus,  new  to  the  light,  but  a  noble  warrior, 
and  u])on  Attains,  a  Pergnmene  by  birth,  a  pillar  and  ground  at 
all  times  of  our  Church,  and  upon  Blandina,  through  whom  Christ 
showed  how  that  which  is  little  esteemed  and  uncomely,  and 
despised  by  men,  is  accounted  worthy  of  glory  by  God,  through 
His  love,  which  is  shown  in  power  and  not  by  outward  boasting. 

"  For  whereas  we  all  doubted  of  her,  and  even  her  mistress 
according  to  the  flesh,  who  herself  was  one  of  the  combatants, 
anxiously  feared  lest  she  should  not  be  able,  through  her  bodily 
weakness,  to  make  an  open  confession,  Blandina  was  filled  with 
such  strength  as  utterly  to  weary  out  those  who  assailed  her  with 
every  kind  of  torment  fmm  morning  till  evening,  till  they  them- 
selves confessed  that  tliey  could  do  nothing  further  to  her,  and 
marvelled  that  she  still  breathed  when  her  whole  body  was 
broken  and  laid  open,  and  she  had  sufTered  torments,  any  one  of 
which  was  sulTicient  to  have  destroyed  her  life,  lUit  the  blessed 
maiden,  like  a  noble  athlete,  gained  new  spirit  by  her  confession. 
To  her  it  was  a  relief  and  a  refreshment  and  a  deadening  of  pain 
to  say,  *  I  am  a  Christian,'  and  '  We  do  nothing  wrong.' 

"As  for  Sanctus,   he  endured   gallantlv  cruelties  unutterable 


IREN^US.  397 

and  l)eyond  all  human  parallel,  the  ungodly  hoping,  through  the 
persistency  and  violence  of  the  tortures,  to  wring  from  him  some 
unlawful  word.  But  so  steadfastly  did  he  resist  them,  that  he 
never  so  much  as  revealed  his  name,  his  country,  or  his  city,  nor 
whether  he  was  bond  or  free  ;  but  returned  to  all  their  questions 
but  one  answer,  '  I  am  a  Christian.'  This  was  his  name,  this  his 
city,  his  country,  his  everything  :  nor  did  the  Gentiles  hear  from 
him  any  other  word.  Therefore  was  there  a  great  contention 
among  the  governor  and  the  executioners  against  him  ;  so  that, 
having  nothing  else  to  turn  to,  they  fastened  plates  of  red-hot 
copper  to  the  softest  parts  of  his  body,  and  so  let  them  burn. 
But  he  remained  unmoved  and  unyielding,  firm  in  confession, 
bedewed  and  strengthened  by  the  heavenly  fountain  of  the  water 
of  life  that  issueth  forth  from  the  heart  of  Christ. 

"  His  poor  body  was  a  witness  of  his  sufferings,  being  one 
wound  and  weal,  all  drawn  together  and  distorted  out  of  all 
recognisable  shape.  In  him  Christ  suffered  and  accomplished 
great  glory,  destroying  the  adversary,  and  signifying  by  this 
example  that  nothing  is  terrible  where  the  Father's  love  is,  nor 
grievous  where  Christ's  glory  is.  For  when  after  some  days  the 
ungodly  once  more  tortured  him,  hoping  to  get  the  better  of  him 
by  repeating  all  the  former  punishments  upon  his  swollen  and 
inflamed  body,  which  could  not  bear  even  the  slightest  touch  of 
the  hand,  or  else  thinking  that  he  might  die  under  the  torture 
and  so  strike  horror  into  the  rest ;  the  result  turned  out  other- 
wise than  was  expected,  for  in  the  second  tortures  he  recovered 
himself  and  straightened  his  body,  and  resumed  his  former  appear- 
ance and  the  use  of  his  limbs.  Thus  the  second  infliction  of 
torture  became  no  punishment  to  him,  but  rather  healing  through 
the  grace  of  Christ. 

"  Then  there  was  Biblias,  one  of  those  who  had  denied  Christ. 
The  devil,  thinking  he  was  already  sure  of  her,  but  wishing  to 
condemn  her  also  by  means  of  blasphemy,  led  her  to  punishment, 
urging  her  to  speak  unhallowed  things  of  us,  deeming  her  spirit- 
less and  already  crushed.  But  she  by  the  torture  recovered  her 
senses,  waking  up  as  it  were  from  a  deep  sleep  ;  being  reminded  by 
temporal  chastisements  of  the  eternal  punishment  of  hell.  And 
so  she  plainly  contradicted  their  calumnies,  saying,  'How  can  such 
as  they  devour  children,  seeing  they  ai-e  not  permitted  to  eat  the 
blood  even  of  brute  beasts  ? '  And  with  that  she  acknowledged 
herself  a  Christian,  and  was  added  to  the  martvrs'  list. 


398  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

"Now  when  the  tyrant's  punishments  were  brought  to  nought 
by  Christ  through  the  patience  of  His  saints,  the  devil  contrived 
a  fresh  phin,  namely,  to  shut  them  up  in  a  darksome  prison  and 
a  most  loathsome  dungeon,  where  their  feet  were  stretched 
apart  in  the  stocks  even  to  the  fifth  hole,  and  they  suffered  all 
sorts  of  cruelties  such  as  infuriated  jailers  full  of  devilish  malice 
love  to  inflict.  So  that  the  greater  part  were  suffocated  in  the 
prison,  those,  that  is,  whom  the  Lord  willed  so  to  die,  manifesting 
forth  His  glory.  Yet  those  who  had  been  most  bitterly  abused, 
whom  it  seemed  impossible  that  the  most  tender  nursing  could 
keep  alive,  remained  alive  in  the  dungeon;  being  deprived  indeed  of 
all  human  care,  but  strengthened  and  refreshed  in  body  and  soul 
by  the  Lord,  so  that  they  comforted  and  exhorted  all  the  rest ; 
whereas  the  young  ones  and  they  who  had  but  just  been  seized, 
whose  bodies  had  not  been  before  maltreated,  failed  to  endure  the 
horrors  of  imprisonment  and  perished  within  the  prison. 

"Now  the  blessed  Pothinus,  to  whom  had  been  entrusted  the 
Episcopal  office  in  Lyons,  being  above  ninety  years  old,  broken 
down  in  body  and  scarce  able  to  breathe  from  prolonged  sickness, 
yet  being  revived  by  the  zeal  of  his  spirit  and  the  strong  desire 
for  martyrdom,  was  himself  dragged  before  the  tril)unal.  His 
body  was  sinking  down  under  old  age  and  infirmity,  but  he  kept 
his  soul  firm,  that  Christ  might  triumph  through  it.  He  was 
brought  forward  by  the  soldiers,  escorted  by  the  political  officers, 
and  accompanied  by  the  loud  shouts  of  the  entire  populace,  and 
even  as  though  he  were  Christ,  he  gave  a  glorious  testimony. 
r>eing  asked  by  the  governor  who  the  Grod  of  the  Christians 
was,  he  replied,  '  Thou  shalt  know  if  thou  beest  worthy.'  Then 
was  he  mercilessly  dragged  about  and  suffered  innumerable 
stripes  :  those  who  were  nearest  smiting  him  with  hands  and 
feet,  and  showing  no  reverence  to  his  old  age,  and  those  at  a 
distance  hurling  at  him  whatever  missile  they  had  at  hand,  all 
of  them  thinking  it  an  unpardonable  omission  if  they  left  any 
kind  of  cruelty  untried.  For  thus  they  imagined  they  were 
avenging  the  cause  of  their  gods.  At  length,  scarcely  breathing, 
he  was  thrown  into  the  dungeon,  where  after  two  days  he  gave 
up  the  ghost. 

"  And  here  there  appeared  a  signal  instance  of  the  providence 
of  Cod  and  of  the  boundless  mercy  of  Jesus;  such  a  thing  as 
happens  not  often  in  the  brotherhood,  but  quite  in  keei)ing  with 
the  practice  of  Christ.      For  tliose  who  on  their  lirst  arrest  had 


IREN^US.  399 

recanted  were  now  imprisoned  with  the  rest  and  shared  their 
miseries.  Even  their  recantation  had  not  availed  them.  For 
while  those  who  had  confessed  what  they  really  were  were  im- 
prisoned simply  as  Christians,  and  on  no  other  charge,  these 
others  were  detained  on  the  charge  of  murder  and  uncleanness, 
and  had  to  suffer  a  double  punishment.  The  former  were  com- 
forted by  the  joy  of  martyrdom,  and  the  hope  of  the  promises, 
by  the  love  of  Christ,  and  the  Spirit  of  the  Father.  But  these 
were  tormented  by  their  own  conscience,  as  their  appearance 
unmistakably  showed  while  they  were  being  led  from  prison. 
The  one  came  forth  joyously,  with  glory  and  great  grace  spread 
over  their  countenances,  so  that  their  fetters  lay  on  them  like 
beauteous  ornaments,  even  as  a  bride  is  decked  with  necklets  of 
finely-wrought  gold.  Moreover,  they  breathed  forth  the  sweet 
perfume  of  Christ,  so  that  people  fancied  they  had  been  anointed 
with  ointment  of  this  w^orld.  But  the  others  came  forth  down- 
cast and  shamefaced  and  ill-visaged,  being  filled  with  all  uncome- 
liness,  so  that  even  the  Gentiles  reviled  them  for  abjects  and 
cowards,  for  they  lay  under  the  guilt  of  murderers,  and  had  lost 
the  honourable  and  life-giving  title  of  martyrs.  And  the  rest  be- 
holding them  were  made  the  more  steadfast,  and  those  that  were 
seized  made  an  unwavering  confession,  giving  no  heed  to  the 
suggestions  of  the  devil. 

"  After  this  their  witness  was  sealed  by  every  form  of  death. 
For  they  had  woven  a  single  chaplet  of  flowers  of  every  hue  and 
offered  it  to  their  Father.  And  it  behoved  such  noble  com- 
batants, having  fought  in  every  kind  of  contest  and  conquered 
mightily,  to  receive  the  great  prize  of  immortality.  First, 
Maturus,  Sanctus,  Blandina  and  Attalus  were  led  forth  and 
thrown  to  the  beasts  at  the  inhuman  public  spectacle  of  the 
Gentiles,  for  a  beast-fight  was  given  on  that  day  expressly  on 
account  of  our  brethren.  Then  Maturus  and  Sanctus  once  more 
went  through  every  form  of  punishment  in  the  amphitheatre,  as 
though  they  had  endured  nothing  before,  or  rather  as  having 
vanquished  the  adversary  already  in  many  jousts,  and  now  pre- 
paring for  the  final  issue  of  the  crown.  First  they  endured  the 
whole  list  of  scourgings  usual  on  such  occasions ;  then  they  were 
dragged  about  by  the  beasts  ;  then  they  suffered  whatever  else  the 
raging  multitude  vociferously  demanded  ;  and  at  last  the  torture  of 
the  iron  chair,  on  which  their  flesh  was  fried,  and  the  steam  enve- 
loped them.    Nor  did  this  satisfy  their  tormentors;  they  only  raged 


400  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  more  fiercely,  being  deterinineil  to  vanquish  their  resolution. 
Yet  not  one  word  did  tliey  extract  from  Sanctus  except  the  single 
form  of  confession  which  he  had  uttered  from  the  first.  These  two, 
then,  having  survived  through  all  this  varied  agony,  were  at  length 
put  to  the  sword,  having  become  a  spectacle  to  the  world  in  place 
of  the  accustomed  gladiatorial  contests.  Blandina  was  hung  up  on 
a  cross,  and  exposed  to  a  succession  of  wild  beasts ;  and  being  seen 
thus  lifted  up,  by  her  fervent  prayer  she  inspired  great  courage 
into  the  martyrs ;  for  they  saw  through  and  beyond  their  sister, 
even  with  their  outward  eyes,  the  form  of  Ilim  who  was  crucified 
for  them,  to  assure  them  that  every  one  who  suffers  for  the  glory 
of  Christ  shall  have  everlasting  fellowship  with  the  living  God. 
Now  since  none  of  the  beasts  would  touch  her,  she  was  taken 
down  from  the  tree  and  sent  back  to  prison  to  be  kept  for  another 
spectacle,  to  the  end  that,  being  victorious  in  many  fights,  she 
might  make  the  condemnation  of  the  crooked  serpent  inevitable, 
and  small,  weak,  and  contemptible  as  she  was,  might  encourage 
the  brethren,  having  put  on  Christ,  the  great  and  invincible 
Athlete.  Yea,  in  many  contests  she  worsted  the  enemy  and  won, 
through  conflict,  the  incorruptible  crown. 

"  Attalus,  moreover,  as  one  of  repute,  was  loudly  demanded  by 
the  multitude,  and  entered  the  lists  a  ready  warrior,  owing  to  his 
good  conscience ;  since  he  had  been  genuinely  trained  in  Christ's 
discipline,  and  had  been  a  consistent  witness  for  the  truth.  He 
was  carried  round  the  arena,  preceded  by  a  placard  on  which  was 
written,  'This  is  Attalus,  the  Christian.'  The  multitude  were 
specially  eager  over  him  ;  and  the  governor,  when  he  knew  that 
he  was  a  Romaji,  ordered  him  to  be  removed  with  the  rest  who 
were  confined  in  prison.  About  these  he  wrote  to  Cresar,  and 
awaited  his  orders  how  to  deal  with  them. 

*'  The  interval  meanwhile  was  not  idle  or  profitless,  but  through 
their  patience  the  infinite  mercy  of  Christ  shone  foith.  For  the 
dead  were  quickened  by  the  living ;  and  martyrs  showed  grace 
to  those  who  were  not  martyrs  ;  and  great  was  the  joy  of  tlie 
'  Virgin  Mother  as  she  received  back  alive  those  whom  she  had 
cast  forth  as  untimely  born,  liut  the  greater  part  of  the  lapsed 
were  conceived  anew,  and  cherished  and  bronglit  to  birth,  and 
learned  to  confess,  and  at  length,  alive  and  vigorous,  they  ap- 
proached the  judgment-seat ;  God,  wlu)  willcth  not  the  death  of  a 
sinner,  butdealeth  kindly  with  him  on  repentance,  shedding  sweet- 
ness on  them,  and  j)rei)aring  them  to  stand  before  the  governor. 


IREN^US.  401 

"  JSTow  Caesar's  rescript  was  that  they  should  be  tortured,  but 
released  if  they  denied  Christ.  Wherefore  the  governor,  seeing 
that  the  great  festival  of  this  large  and  populous  neighbourhood 
was  commencing,  brought  the  blessed  ones  before  his  tribunal  to 
make  a  show  of  them  and  so  gratify  the  mob.  He  once  more 
questioned  them ;  and  such  as  could  prove  their  Roman  citizen- 
ship were  beheaded,  and  the  rest  thrown  to  the  beasts. 

"  Then  was  Christ  greatly  glorified  in  those  who  before  had 
denied  Him,  and  now  to  the  surprise  of  the  Gentiles  confessed  Him. 
The  governor  examined  them  separately,  thinking  they  would  be 
released;  but  they  confessed  and  were  added  to  the  martyrs' 
roll.  Those  only  remained  without,  who  had  no  grain  of  faith, 
nor  perception  of  the  bridal  garment,  nor  sense  of  the  fear  of  God, 
but  by  their  mode  of  life  had  done  despite  unto  the  way,  being 
the  children  of  perdition;  but  all  the  rest  were  added  to  the 
Church.  Among  those  who  were  questioned  was  one  Alexander, 
a  Phrygian,  a  physician  by  profession,  who  had  spent  many  years 
in  Gaul,  and  was  known  to  all  for  his  love  to  God  and  boldness 
in  the  world,  and  for  his  share  in  the  apostolic  gifts.  He  stood 
by  the  judgment-seat,  and  beckoning  to  the  rest,  he  exhorted 
them  to  confess,  and  appeared  to  those  about  him  like  one  in 
travail.  But  the  mob,  full  of  rage  at  seeing  them  ready  to 
confess,  shouted  out  that  it  was  Alexander  who  had  made  them 
do  it.  Then  the  governor  turned  to  him  and  asked  him  who  he 
was.  On  his  replying  that  he  was  a  Christian,  the  governor  fell 
into  a  rage  and  condemned  him  to  the  beasts.  And  on  the  next  day 
he  and  Attalus  were  brought  forward,  for  Attalus  also,  to  please 
tlie  multitude,  was  thrown  to  the  beasts.  These  two  passed 
through  all  the  forms  of  torture  devised  by  human  cruelty,  and 
having  endured  a  glorious  conflict,  were  at  last  put  to  the  sword. 
Alexander  uttered  not  one  groan  or  sound  of  any  kind,  but  in 
his  heart  conversed  with  God.  But  Attalus,  when  placed  upon 
the  red-hot  chair  and  consumed,  when  his  flesh  melted  from  his 
bones,  cried  out  in  Latin,  '  Lo !  this  it  is  to  eat  human  flesh,  and 
ye  are  they  who  do  it.  But  we  neither  eat  human  flesh  nor  do 
anything  unlawful.'  And  when  asked  God's  name,  he  replied, 
'  God  has  no  name  as  men  have.' 

"  At  length,  on  the  last  day  of  the  games,  Blandina  was  once 
more  led  in  with  a  boy  of  fifteen,  named  Ponticus.  Each  day 
they  had  been  compelled  to  witness  the  torments  of  the  rest,  in 
the  hope  that  they  might  be  induced  to  swear  by  the  idols.     The 

2  C 


402  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

people  grew  more  and  more  savage  at  the  sight  of  their  constancy, 
pitying  neither  the  youth  of  the  boy  nor  the  sex  of  the  maiden. 

"  They  made  them  suffer  every  form  of  torture,  urging  them 
after  each  was  over  to  swear,  but  without  efYect.  Ponticus, 
exhorted  l)y  liis  sister,  so  that  all  might  see  that  it  was  she  who 
gave  him  courage,  after  bravely  enduring  all  the  punishments,  at 
length  yielded  up  his  life.  But  the  blessed  Blandina,  last  of  all, 
like  a  high-born  mother  who  had  encouraged  her  children  and 
sent  them  in  triumph  to  the  King,  herself  enduring  all  the 
anguish  of  her  children,  hastened  after  them  joyful  and  exulting, 
not  like  one  thrown  to  beasts,  but  like  one  called  to  a  marriage 
banquet.  And  after  the  scourge,  after  the  beasts,  after  the  iron 
chair,  last  of  all  she  was  flung  into  a  net  and  thrown  to  a  wild 
bull.  Then,  being  tossed  many  times,  and  having  no  sense  of 
anything  that  happened  to  her  through  her  hope  and  expectation 
of  the  promise  of  her  fellowship  with  Christ,  she  was  put  to  death 
with  the  sword,  the  Gentiles  themselves  confessing  that  never 
had  any  woman  among  them  endured  such  grievous  woes. 

"  Yet  not  even  then  was  their  madness  assuaged,  nor  their 
fierce  hatred  of  the  saints ;  for,  like  savage  tribes  of  barbarians 
maddened  by  a  fierce  wild  beast,  they  could  not  be  quieted ;  so 
their  malice  took  a  new  beginning,  venting  itself  upon  the  dead 
bodies.  For,  instead  of  being  ashamed  at  their  defeat,  as  they 
would  if  they  had  had  any  human  feeling,  their  rage  burned  all 
the  more  fiercely,  governor  and  people  vieing  with  each  other  in 
the  malignity  they  displayed,  that  the  Scripture  might  be  fulfilled 
which  saith,  *  He  that  is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust  still,  and  he 
that  is  righteous  let  him  be  righteous  still.'  For  those  that  were 
suffocated  in  the  dungeon  they  flung  to  dogs,  keeping  strict 
guard  over  th.em  day  and  night,  lest  any  should  be  buried  by  us. 
Then  they  collected  the  remnants  left  from  the  beasts  and  flames, 
all  torn  and  charred,  and  the  severed  heads  and  trunks,  and 
guarded  them  with  a  military  watch  for  many  days,  to  ensure 
their  being  unburied.  Some  grinned  and  gnashed  their  teeth  at 
them,  seeking  further  vengeance ;  others  laughed  and  mocked, 
magnifying  their  idols,  and  ascribing  to  tliem  the  martyi-s'  punish- 
ment. But  those  that  were  of  gentler  mootl,  and  had  some  human 
feeling,  reproached  us,  saying,  'Where  is  now  (heir  God?  What 
did  their  religion  ])rofit  them,  which  they  clu^so  before  their  own 
lives?'  Such  was  the  different  behaviour  of  these  men.  Our 
.side  was  plunged  into  the  deepest  mourning  because  we  could  not 


IREN^US.  403 

hide  their  bodies  in  the  earth.  For  night  helped  us  not,  nor  did 
money  avail,  nor  supplications  move  them ;  but  in  every  way  they 
kept  guard  over  them,  thinking  it  great  gain  if  they  could  hinder 
them  from  burial. 

"  For  six  days  the  bodies  of  the  martyrs  were  exposed  and 
exhibited,  and  then  were  burnt  and  reduced  to  ashes,  and  thrown 
all  together  into  the  river  Rhone,  which  flows  hard  by,  in  order 
that  no  relic  of  them  might  ever  again  appear  on  earth.  This 
they  did,  thinking  they  could  outwit  God,  and  deprive  them  of 
the  new  birth,  saying  that  now  they  could  have  no  hope  of  any 
resurrection,  for  the  sake  of  which  they  had  brought  in  a  new 
and  strange  creed,  and  despised  torments,  and  marched  joyfully 
to  death.  *  Now  let  us  see  whether  they  rise  again,  and  whether 
their  God  is  able  to  succour  them  or  deliver  them  out  of  our 
hands.' " 


CHAPTEK  X. 

THE  GRAECO-ROMAN  SCHOOL-MURATORIAN  FRAG- 
MENT—IIIPPOLYTUS— CAWS— VICTOR  AND  OTHERS 
(a.d.  170-235?). 

After  an  interval  of  near  a  century,  we  turn  our  eyes  again 
upon  the  Uonian  Church.  If  we  except  the  Shepherd  of 
Hernias,  no  literary  work  had  emanated  from  that  Church 
since  Clement  wrote  his  great  epistle.  Its  energies  had  been 
concentrated  on  the  more  pressing  business  of  discipline  and 
organisation,  of  establishing  relations  with  foreign  churches, 
and  of  restraining  the  spread  of  heresy.  The  theologians 
and  controversialists  of  Christendom  had  been  trained  else- 
where. Most  of  them  no  doubt  had  come  to  liome  on  \dsits 
more  or  less  prolonged,  as  Polycarp,  Justin,  Tatian,  Irengeus. 
But  their  object  was  to  teach  rather  than  to  learn,  to  give 
and  not  to  receive.  Ptome  was  the  meeting-ground  of  the 
champions  of  every  school,  Catholic  and  schismatic,  orthodox 
and  heretical.  The  aggressor  was  there,  ready  to  launch  his 
])olts  into  the  citadel.  The  defender  had  need  to  be  there 
also,  and  prepared  to  dispute  every  inch  of  ground. 

Hitlierto  the  official  stamp  of  Pome  had  not  been  clearly 
impressed  on  the  policy  of  her  Church,  or  if  it  had,  the  world 
did  not  recognise  it.  And  yet  there  are  indications  of  it. 
Already  in  S.  Clement's  letter,  an  assumption,  so  natural  as 
to  ])e  almost  unconscious,  of  the  right  to  advise  and  interpose, 
underlies  his  pacificatory  argument.  And  this  tendency 
grew  and  strengthened  as  much  from  the  necessities  of  the 
case  as  from  tlie  deliberate  action  of  the  Church.  Xowhere 
was  it  so  natural  to  look  for  revision  of  disputed  decisions,  for 
authoritative  tradition,  for  the  rule  of  faith,  as  to  the  Church 
n  the  Imperial  city,  the  Church  sealed  with  the  blood  of  tlie 
two  chief  Apostles.     Had  Rome  been  less  willing  than  she 


404 


THE   GRAECO-ROMAN   SCHOOL.  405 

was  to  assume  the  leading  part,  it  would  assuredly  have  been 
thrust  upon  her. 

There  was,  however,  one  obstacle  to  the  effective  use  of  her 
advantages,  viz.,  her  retention  of  the  Greek  language.  So 
long  as  the  Christian  body  in  Kome  represented  an  alien 
community,  wholly  out  of  touch  with  the  native  population, 
and  using  a  different  language  from  that  of  the  civil  authority, 
it  was  impossible  adequately  to  impress  upon  the  world  the 
associations  that  the  name  of  Eonie  embodied.  Now  until 
near  the  close  of  the  second  century  the  bishops,  as  a  rule, 
had  borne  Greek  names,  and  all  Church  documents  had  gone 
forth  in  the  Greek  language.  But  with  the  accession  of 
Victor  (a.d.  187)  a  new  epoch  was  inaugurated,  a  new  stage 
of  growth  reached.  The  slumbering  spirit  of  domination 
awoke  fresh  and  vigorous.  The  mission  of  Eome  to  impose 
rules  of  union  began  to  be  more  or  less  distinctly  realised. 
The  Asiatic  Irengeus  felt  the  spell.  In  him  is  seen  at  work 
the  twofold  tendency,  of  speculative  theology  on  the  one 
hand,  and  organic  ecclesiasticism  on  the  other,  harmonious 
as  yet,  and  perhaps  unconsciously  combined — certainly  in  no 
sense  contrasted — which  was  destined  in  its  future  develop- 
ment to  exercise  an  incalculable  influence  over  Christendom. 

But  the  new  departure  did  not  come  all  at  once.  For 
some  time  longer  the  Greek  language  was  retained  for 
liturgical  uses,  and  was  employed  by  more  than  one  leading 
theological  writer.  It  is  not  certain  when  Latin  supplanted 
Greek  in  public  worship  ;  but  it  is  likely  that  for  some 
years  both  languages  were  in  use,  and  it  has  even  been 
suggested  that  a  second  or  coadjutor  bishop  was  appointed 
to  attend  to  the  Greek-speaking  congregations. 

At  any  rate,  by  the  middle  of  the  third  century  the  Churcli 
had  become  thoroughly  Latin  ;  her  public  documents  hi  lan- 
guage and  contents  assimilate  closely  to  state-papers  ;  while 
each  step  of  her  policy  reveals  a  trained  political  intelligence. 
In  effecting  this  transformation,  it  is  obvious  that  new 
(qualities  were  required  in  the  leading  men.  Aptitude  for 
afJiiirs  was  the  first  requisite ;  theological  learning  may  have 
been  desirable,  but  was  not  essential.     It  is  likely  that  many 


4o6  THE  AFOLOCilSTS. 

Cliurchiiicii  whu  lived  through  the  period  found  themselves 
out  of  harmony  with  its  drift.  Such  seems  to  have  been 
the  case  with  twcj  men  of  mark  who  until  lately  have  been 
a  good  deal  confused  together,  Hippolytus  and  Caius ;  the 
former  a  highly  important  authority  on  many  subjects,  the 
latter  now  somewhat  shorn  of  his  laurels  by  their  transfer- 
ence to  his  greater  contemporary ;  both  of  them  mtelligent 
])ut  evidently  unsympathetic  witnesses  of  the  contemporary 
development  of  their  churcli. 


The  Fragment  on  the  Canon. 

Before  treating  of  these  two  writers,  it  will  be  necessary 
to  notice  briefly  a  document  which  has  been  ascribed  to  them 
both,  and  which,  though  short,  is  of  peculiar  interest,  first  as 
the  earliest  Latin  writing  of  the  lioman  Church,  and  secondly, 
as  an  important  link  in  the  evidence  for  the  Canon  of  the 
Xew  Testament.  This  is  the  fragment,  discovered  in  the 
Aml)rosian  Library  at  Milan  in  a  MS.  of  the  seventh  or 
eighth  century,  which  originally  belonged  to  Columban's 
monastery  at  B(jbbio.  It  was  publislied  in  1740  by  ^lura- 
tori,  and  is  usually  known  as  the  Muratorian  Fragment. 
It  is  incomplete  both  at  the  beginning  and  end,  and  disligured 
by  remarkable  barbarisms,  but  contains  enough  valualile 
matter  to  make  us  lament  its  incompleteness. 

The  original  MS.,  in  addition  to  other  matter,  comprised 
a  list  of  those  writings  of  the  New  Testament  which  the 
Iioman  Church  acknowledged  as  canonical,  besides  criticisms 
on  other  writings  which  claimed  or  had  acquired  the  authority 
of  inspiration.  From  its  peculiar  idiom,  and  also  on  general 
grounds,  it  is  almost  universally  allowed  to  be  a  translation 
from  the  Greek.^  Lightfoot  has  attempted  to  reconstruct 
l)ortions  of  the  Greek  original,  and  in  doing  so  has  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  it  was  written  in  iainl)ic  verse,  a  ])oint 

*  Wostcott  (Canon  of  the  Acir  'J'cstamcnt,  ji.irt  i.  ch.  ii.)  says  tliat,  if  it 
be  studied  as  a  wliolc,  no  one  who  bus  much  experience  in  Greek  and 
Latin  comjiosition  will  doubt  that  it  is  a  translation.  Hosso.  however, 
docs  doubt  it. 


THE  MURATORIAN  FRAGMENT.  407 

which   he   thinks   important   in    deciding   the   question  of 
authorship. 

A  summary  of  the  Koman  Church's  judgment  on  the  canon 
must  needs  possess  great  theological  significance.  For  this 
subject,  which  does  not  concern  us  here,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  Westcott's  work.  From  certain  coincidences  in  his  account 
of  S.  Mark  and  S.  John,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  the 
writer,  whoever  he  may  have  been,  was  acquainted  with  the 
Expositions  of  Papias.  This  is  highly  probable.  For  instance, 
the  following  tradition  of  the  composition  of  S.  John's  Gospel 
surely  must  have  come  from  Papias  : — 

"John  was  urged  by  his  fellow-disciples  and  bishops  to  write 
a  Gospel.  He  replied,  '  Fast  with  me  three  days,  and  then  let 
us  report  to  each  other  the  revelation  we  may  receive.'  On  the 
same  night  it  was  revealed  to  the  Apostle  Andrew  ^  that  John 
should  write  an  account  of  everything  in  his  own  name,  and  that 
it  should  then  be  revised  and  approved  by  the  rest." 

Another  curious  point  made  by  the  writer  savours  strongly 
of  Papias.  He  draws  a  parallel  between  the  Apostles  Paul 
and  John  on  the  ground  that  each  wrote  epistles  to  seven 
churches  and  no  more,  thus  signifying  mystically  that  the 
One  Church  in  its  sevenfold  perfection  was  the  true  Body  of 
Christ. 

As  to  the  date  and  authorship  of  the  fragment,  three 
conjectures  have  been  made.  The  first  and  most  generally 
received  attributes  it  to  an  anonymous  author  of  a.d.  170  or 
thereabouts.  It  relies  on  the  chronological  reference  in  the 
fragment  itself,  that  "  the  Shepherd  of  Hernias  was  written 
quite  recently  in  our  own  times  during  the  pontificate  of 
l?ius."  Now  this  pontificate  is  variously  given  as  a.d.  1 27-142, 
or  A.D.  142-157.  Taken  in  their  obvious  sense,  the  words 
above  quoted  imply  a  date  not  long  after  Pius'  death.  We 
refer  of  course  to  the  Greek  original,  not  to  the  existing 
Latin,  which  is  doubtless  somewhat  later.  If  this  date  be 
accepted,  the  evidence  for  the  New  Testament  Canon  gains 

1  Observe  that,  according  to  this  author,  S.  Andrew  survived  to  the 
closing  years  of  the  first  century.     This  is  obviously  an  ancient  tradition. 


4o8  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

considt'r;i])ly,  l>L'iiig    tliiowii   Ijack  to   a   date   earlier   than 
Irena3iis. 

The  second  conjecture  is  that  of  Muratori  himself.  He 
ascril)cdit  to  the  IJonian  presbyter  Caius,  about  whom  some- 
thing will  be  said  presently.  This  would  bring  its  date 
down  forty  or  lifty  years,  to  the  first  quarter  of  the  tliird 
century.  This  hypothesis  is  adopted  by  Salmon,  who  adduces 
the  following  arguments : — 

1.  ]\Iontanism  is  clearly  referred  to  in  the  fragment,  and 
this,  there  is  good  reason  to  think,  did  not  make  its  appear- 
ance in  the  West  until  after  a.d.  200. 

2.  In  estimating  the  weight  of  the  expression  "  quite  recently 
in  our  own  time,"  regard  must  be  had  to  the  purpose  of  the 
writer.  He  is  not  writing  for  purposes  of  history,  but  of 
teacliing,  and  to  some  extent,  of  controversy.  In  disparaging 
the  modernness  of  Hernias,  therefore,  as  contrasted  with  the 
anti<iuity  of  the  Apostles,  he  speaks  contemptuously  of  the 
interval  that  had  elapsed  as  a  mere  nothing.  Moreover, 
L^ood  L^rounds  can  be  advanced  for  thinkin<r  he  was  mistaken 
about  the  date  of  Hernias,  as  we  have  already  shown  is  the 
case;  it  is  probable  he  was  not  so  near  a  contemporary  of 
Pius  as  the  words  at  first  imply. 

The  third  conjecture  is  tliat  first  suggested  by  Salmon, 
and  afterwards  adopted  by  Lightfoot,  that  Ilippolytus  is  the 
author.  In  the  list  of  his  works  we  read  one  entitled, 
"  A\'rses  about  all  the  Scriptures."  ^  These  Lightfoot  thinks 
were  metrical  descriptions  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  and  that  our  fragment  is  a  part  of  one  of  them. 
On  this  sni)i»osition  its  date  need  not  be  brought  down  so 
late  as  a.d.  225,  but  its  evidential  value  will  still  be  posterior 
to  Irena3U8. 

Hippolytus. 

Leaving  the  autliorshi]),  then,  as  an  unsolved  ])roblem,  we 
now  proceed  to  our  account  of  Hippolytus.  It  has  been  re- 
marked by  Professor  Schall'  tliat  this  famous  person  has  lived 
three  lives,  a  real  one  in  tlie  third  century^  as  an  opponent 

*   uSal  els  wdaas  rai  ypa<pd^.     They  may  liave  been  liymns. 


HIPPOLYTUS.  409 

of  the  Popes  of  his  day,  a  fictitious  one  in  the  Middle 
Ages  as  a  canonised  saint,  and  a  literary  one  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  after  the  discovery  of  his  long-lost  work  on 
heresies. 

The  accounts  of  ancient  writers  respecting  him  are  very 
confused.  He  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as  a  presbyter  and 
sometimes  as  a  bishop.  Eusebius  calls  him  a  bishop,  but 
admits  that  he  does  not  know  the  name  of  his  see ;  while 
Jerome,  who  might  be  supposed  to  know  the  history  of  the 
Eoman  Church,  gives  no  more  precise  information.  He  adds, 
however,  the  statement  that  he  was  a  martyr,  but  without 
giving  any  details.  We  gather  from  a  catalogue  of  the 
Popes  (about  A.D.  354)  that  the  Presbyter  Hippolytus  and 
the  Bishop  Pontianus  were  banished  by  Maximin,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Alexander  Severus  (A.D.  235  or  236),  to  the  mines 
of  Sardinia,  from  whence  their  remains  w^ere  conveyed  on 
the  same  day  to  Eome  some  years  later.  The  climate  of 
this  island  was  notoriously  unhealthy,  and  the  hardships  of 
life  in  the  mines  terrible.  It  is  very  likely  that  both  these 
eminent  men  soon  succumbed  to  their  sufferings,  and  were 
counted  as  martyrs,  like  other  confessors  who  died  in  prison. 

The  poet  Prudentius,  who  lived  in  the  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century,  is  more  explicit  in  his  details.  He  describes 
Hippolytus  as  a  member  of  Novatian's  party  (an  anachronism, 
it  should  be  remarked,  of  several  years),  and  states  that 
Ijefore  his  death  he  was  reconciled  to  the  Church,  and  was 
martyred  at  Portus  by  order  of  the  Prefect  of  Eome,  being 
torn  asunder  l)y  wild  horses  after  the  manner  of  the  Hippo- 
lytus of  Greek  legend. 

In  spite  of  its  mistakes  and  improbabilities,  Prudentius 
story  is  considered  by  Lightfoot  and  Schaff  to  contain  some 
elements  of  truth,  especially  as  to  the  schismatical  attitude 
of  Hippolytus  and  his  connection  with  Portus,  the  seaport 
of  Eome.  (Jther  ancient  notices  allude  to  him  as  Bishop  of 
Arabia,  others  as  Bishop  of  Eome.  It  is  evident  that  very 
little  w^as  known  about  him. 

In  the  sixteenth  century  a  marble  statue  was  discovered, 
dating  from  tlie  middle  of  the  third  century,  representing  a 


4IO  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

seated  fij^nire  c>\i(l('iitly  iiitciided  for  a  bishop.  On  the  l)ack 
of  the  cathedra  or  cjiiscopal  cliair  are  engraved  the  Paschal 
cycle  of  Hi])])()lytus  and  the  titles  of  several  works,  presum- 
ably those  of  the  seated  figure.  Most  of  these  works  are 
now  known  to  ha\t'  l»een  written  by  Hippolytus. 

Again,  in  1 85 1 ,  Miller  published  from  a  fourteenth  century 
MS.  a  work  in  ten  books,  of  which  the  first  three  and  a 
half  were  wanting,  and  which  purported  to  be  a  refutation 
of  all  heresies.  He  saw  that  it  was  the  same  work  of  which 
one  book  was  already  well  known  to  theologians  as  the 
Philosoi^humciia ,  and  included  among  Origen's  works.  ^liller 
ascribed  the  whole  to  Origen,  but  erroneously.  Others 
claimed  it  for  Caius,  but  it  was  gradually  established  by 
several  scholars,  and  most  convincingly  l)y  iJi illinger,  that 
the  true  author  was  Hippolytus.  This  fact  once  established, 
much  light  was  thrown  l)y  the  work  itself  on  the  authorship 
of  several  other  treatises  which  had  l)een  doubtfully  ascribed 
to  him,  and  also  on  certain  circumstances  of  his  life,  which 
l)artly  explain  the  conflicting  statements  about  his  relations 
with  the  Iioman  Church. 

Putting  together  the  information  from  various  sources,  we 
can  infer  with  certainty  that  he  was  a  bishop,  who  flourished 
in  or  near  Home  during  the  pontificates  of  Zejihyrinus  and 
Callistus,  and  probably  for  some  years  after  the  hitter's 
death  (a.d.  223) ;  that  he  was  at  one  time  a  hearer  of  Irena}us 
at  Rome;  that  he  received  as  genuine  only  thirteen  et)istles 
of  S.  Paul ;  that  he  was  a  man  of  *aeat  learning  and  a  volu- 
minous  autlior,  and  that  he  exercised  episcopal  functions 
among  Gentiles  of  various  nationalities.  AVe  know  also, 
from  the  ninth  book  of  the  J^hi/osopJunnrna,  that  he  took  an 
active  ])art  in  the  affairs  of  the  Iioman  Church  ;  that  he  was 
in  a  ]»osiiion  of  antagonism  to  both  Zephyrinus  and  Callistus, 
regarding  them  (and  es])e('ially  the  latter),  on  account  of  the 
laxity  of  their  disci])line,  as  no  true  bisho])s;  and  that  they 
in  their  turn  accused  him  of  ditheism,  and  cut  him  oH'  from 
their  conununion.  lieyond  this  we  are  left  to  conjecture. 
Dollinger's  view  is  that  Hi])])()lytus  himself  claimed  to  l)e  the 
IJisho])  of  IJdiiie  ill  o). posit  ion  to  ( 'allislus.  w  lioiii  he  designates 


HIPPOLYTUS.  411 


as  the  leader  of  a  school ;  1  and  that  although  he  was  never 
acknowledged  by  the  Eoman  Church,  yet,  as  his  writmgs 
were  widely  circulated  in  the  Greek-speaking  world,  we 
can  easily  understand  how  he  was  spoken  of  in  the  East 
universally  as  Bishop,  and  very  frequently  as  Bishop  of 
Rome. 

The  difficulty,  however,  of  supposing  that  a  schism  so 
extensive  and  long-continued  in  the  centre  of  Western  Christi- 
anity could  have  passed  unnoticed  by  every  Church  historian, 
is  so  great  that  another  theory  has  been  advanced  which 
accounts  equally  well  for  the  facts,  and  which  has  substan- 
tially secured  the  adherence  of  Lightfoot's  great  authority. 
This  is  that  Hippolytus  was  invested  with  episcopal  autho- 
rity not  over  any  territorial  see,  but  over  certain  congrega- 
tions residino;  either  in  Ptome  itself  or  at  Portus,  which  at 
this  time  had  almost  superseded  its  opposite  neighbour  Ostia 
as  the  commercial  part  of  Ptome.  The  difficulty  is  to  decide 
what  the  congregations  were.  At  Eome  it  is  probable  that 
the  Greek-speaking  portion  of  the  Church,  which  was  now 
becoming  a  fast-diminishing  minority,  might  require  the 
ministrations  of  a  bishop  able  to  speak  Greek,  and  acquainted 
with  Greek  customs.  And  it  has  been  supposed  that  Hippo- 
lytus may  have  been  appointed  by  Victor  for  this  purpose, 
which  would  account  for  his  assumption  of  a  right  to  inter- 
fere in  Roman  affairs.  Lightfoot's  view  inclines  to  place  the 
scene  of  his  episcopal  activity  at  Portus,  where  a  motley 
crowd  of  all  nationalities — seamen,  dockers,  stevedores, 
merchants,  &c. — was  always  busily  employed,  and  where 
undoubtedly  a  bishop  would  find  plenty  of  work.'- 

This  hypothesis  accounts  for  nearly  all  the  doubts  and 
contradictions  in  our  authorities.  It  explains  how  lie  was 
a  bishop,  yet  without  a  see;  how  he  felt  himself  justified 
in  intervening  so  powerfully  in  Roman  affairs,  yet  without 
diocesan  authority,  as  to  be  called  in  error  Bishop  of  Rome ; 
furthermore,  how  he  gained  the  title  "  Bishop  of  the  Gentiles." 

^  dioaaKoXeTov. 

2  We  observe  that  Hippolytus  is  not  regarded  as  Bishop  of  Portus,  but 
as  Bishop  in  Portus.     Portus  itself  was  under  the  Roman  See. 


412  THE  APOLOCilSTS. 

It  also  accords  best  with  liis  description  of  tliose  to  whom  he 
addresses  his  arguments,  as  "Greeks  and  barbarians,  Chal- 
dieans  and  Assyrians,  Egyptians  and  Libyans,  Indians  and 
Ethiopians,  Celts  and  Latins  on  foreign  service."  Where 
else  in  the  world,  except  perlia})S  at  Alexandria,  could  be 
seen  so  various  a  crowd  ? 


His  Writing-s. 

We  next  come  to  the  list  of  his  writings.  The  only  one  now 
preserved,  though  unfortunately  not  entire,  is  the  Fhiloso- 
phumcna,  or  "  Treatise  against  all  Heretics,"  and  there  is  no 
doubt  it  w^as  his  most  important  work.  Tlie  plan  is  simple 
enough.  It  is  to  make  heresy  self-refuting  by  an  enumera- 
tion of  its  contradictions  and  absurdities,  and  still  more 
decisively  by  pointing  out  its  ultimate  derivation  from 
heathen  sources.^  The  latter  point  is  an  original  one,  and  if 
it  is  due  to  llippolytus  it  does  credit  to  his  ingenuity;  it  is 
repeated  by  TertuUian,  and  most  likely  was  derived  from  the 
lectures  of  Irena?us.  The  impression  one  obtains  from  a  per- 
usal of  the  ridlosophumaia  is  that  tlie  author  was  extremely 
learned  and  greatly  in  earnest,  but  deficient  in  originality 
and  power  of  analysis.  Nevertheless  there  is  an  immense 
fund  of  knowledge,  interesting  and  uninteresting,  enlivened 
by  a  few  smart  and  occasionally  scandalous  anecdotes.  Of 
these  the  most  extraordinary  is  the  account  in  Book  IX.  of  the 
antecedents  of  his  adversary  Callistus.  This  account,  coloui-ed 
as  it  is  by  bitter  prejudice,  is  to  be  received  with  caution.  Yet 
the  facts  were  before  the  world,  and  must  have  been  noto- 
rious in  liome,  and  we  can  scarcely  believe  that  even  the 
acerbities  of  theological  controversy  would  have  sanctioned 
an  entirely  "fancy"  biography  of  an  ()j)poucnt,  worthy  to  be 
ranked  in  racy  ilavour,  though  not  in  descriptive  iK)wer,  with 
that  of  Tt^schines  by  Demosthenes  or  that  of  Antony  by 
Cicero.  The  reader  may  think  it  worthy  of  rei)roduction  as 
an  anticipation  of  later  incidents  of  a  similar  nature  in  Tapal 
history. 

'  Jik  I.  jroa-in.  v.  §  6. 


HIPPOLYTUS.  413 

Hippolytus  and  Callistus. 

He  declares  that  Callistus  was  at  first  a  slave  in  a  rich 
Christian's  establishment ;  that  his  financial  astuteness  caused 
his  master  to  entrust  him  with  the  management  of  a  bank, 
in  which  position  he  took  advantage  of  the  confidence  of 
his  co-religionists  to  effect  fraudulent  investments ;  that  he 
finally  broke  the  bank,  brought  his  credulous  clients  to  ruin, 
and  absconded.  His  master  traced  him,  however,  and  pre- 
venting a  determined  attempt  at  suicide,  consigned  him  to 
the  corn-factory,  which  was  the  lowest  and  most  laborious 
form  of  servitude.  1  The  sufferers  by  his  roguery  showed  a 
forgiving  spirit,  and  petitioned  for  his  release,  possibly 
thinking  that  his  aptitude  for  finance  might  be  more  usefully 
employed  in  retrieving  their  fortunes  than  in  turning  a  mill. 
His  master  acceded  to  their  request.  But  Callistus,  finding 
himself  unable  to  make  good  his  promises,  raised  a  tumult  in  a 
Jewish  synagogue,  apparently  with  the  intention  of  bringing 
on  himself  the  punishment  of  death.  Instead  of  this  he  was 
exiled  to  the  mines  of  Sardinia,  where  he  spent  a  few  years. 
But  Marcia,  the  mistress  of  Commodus,  who  was  a  Christian, 
prevailed  on  the  Emperor  to  grant  an  amnesty  to  her  fellow- 
religionists  in  Sardinia.  Victor,  who  was  then  Pope,  was 
ordered  to  draw  up  a  list  of  names,  and  in  this  list  the  name 
of  Callistus  was  not  included.  But  he  was  equal  to  the 
occasion,  and  by  a  special  petition  contrived  to  obtain  his 
recall.  To  Victor's  surprise  and  annoyance,  he  reappeared 
in  Ptome  (a.d.  190),  but  was  induced,  in  consideration  of 
a  moderate  allowance,  to  retire  to  Antium.  It  is  evident 
that  the  ex-slave  had  in  some  way  or  other  managed  to 
make  himself  a  considerable  person  in  the  Church.  He 
remained  at  Antium  till  the  death  of  Victor,  a  period  of 
several  years,  during  which  his  al)ilities  became  generally 
recognised,  and  at  the  accession  of  Zephyrinus  (a.d.  202)  he 

^  The  city  slaves  dreaded  no  punishment  so  much  as  to  be  sent  into  the 
country,  where  unremitting  labour  was  never  relieved  by  the  social  relaxa- 
tions permitted  to  their  more  favoured  compeers.  The  reader  will  recol- 
lect Horace's  threat  when  a  slave  was  urging  some  uncomfortable  home 
truths  :  "  Ni  rapis,  accedes  opera  agro  nona  Sabino." 


414  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

was  at  once  placed  in  a  liigh  position  of  trust,  probably  that 
of  Archdeacon  of  iJonic.  Tossiljly  Hippolytus  thou^^dit  this 
office  should  have  Itecu  conferred  on  liiniself.  But  if  so,  he 
misjudged  liis  (.\vn  (nialifications  and  the  spirit  of  the  time. 
It  was  not  the  profound  student,  but  the  man  of  business 
and  expert  administrator  of  revenue  that  was  in  request. 
Callistus  at  once  intrigued  for  the  reversion  of  the  Papacy, 
trimming  his  l»ark  in  the  great  Monarchian  controversy 
wliich  tlien  raged,  lietween  the  Scylla  of  Saliellianism  and  the 
Charybdis  of  ditheism,  with  dexterous  skill.  Hence,  when 
Zepliyrinus  died,  a  majority  of  the  clergy  chose  him  as  their 
head,  and  Hippolytus,  though  he  refused  to  acknowledge  him, 
was  nevertheless  ol  )liged  to  confess  that  he  had  numbers  on 
Ids  side.  Ap})avently  his  discipline  was  as  lax  as  his  doctrine 
was  doubtful.  Even  during  his  predecessor's  life  his  had  been 
the  hand  that  had  guided  the  policy  of  the  Church,  and  that 
policy  had  always  leaned  strongly  to  liberalism.  Callistus 
carried  this  tendency  so  far  as  to  readmit  without  penance 
all  olJ'enders  who  applied  for  readmission,  to  ordain  digamous 
clergy,  to  change  the  marriage  laws,  and  to  practise  rebaptism. 
Hippolytus  further  declares  that  he  taught  a  l*atripassian 
doctrine  as  heretical  as  that  of  Sabellius.  But  as  Callistus 
contrived  to  fix  upon  Hippolytus  the  still  more  deadly 
charge  of  ditheism,  it  is  diilicult  to  know  how  far  these 
mutual  recriminations  can  on  either  side  be  established. 

The  al>ove  has  been  given  as  a  specimen  of  the  ligliter 
portion  of  Hii)polytus'  Itook,  and  also  as  an  instance  of  the 
fatal  facility  with  which  unscrupulous  ambition  was  able  to 
assert  itstdf  in  the  IJoinau  Church. 

His  Treatise  against  Heretics. 

To  return  to  the  more  purely  literary  aspect  of  the  Fhilo- 
sopliumena,  we  have  already  stated  that  the  first  book  was 
long  attributed  to  Origen.  It  contains  a  succinct  sketch  of 
the  chief  systems  of  Greek  philosojdiy,  whicli  are  }»ut  for- 
ward as  the  original  ty])es,  from  which  heretical  theories 
arc  \ariations  f)r  derivations.  The  second  and  third  books, 
which  are  lost,  no  doubt  dealt  witli  otlicr  heathen  religions  or 


HIPPOLYTUS.  415 

philosophies  ;  but  what  they  were,  we  can  only  conjecture. 
The  fourth  book,  which  is  extremely  difficult,  treats  of  those 
astrological  doctrines  which,  under  the  honoured  name  of 
mathematics,  exercised  a  potent  sway  over  the  minds  of  all 
classes.  The  distinction  so  obvious  to  us  moderns  between 
the  domain  of  science  proper  and  those  outlying  speculations, 
which  under  the  cloak  of  scientific  phraseology  build  up 
fanciful  analogies  or  pry  into  inscrutable  mysteries,  was  by 
no  means  clear  to  the  philosophic  theologian  of  the  third 
century.  The  mixture  of  Oriental  with  Greek  philosophy  had 
muddied  the  clear  stream  of  knowledge ;  and  Hippolytus 
does  but  reflect  the  broken  lights  of  his  day  in  thus  com- 
bining wholly  different  forms  of  thought.  He  is  the  more 
justified  in  so  doing,  as  his  object  is  to  explain  Gnosticism  ; 
and  Gnosticism,  if  anything,  was  a  fusion  of  science,  imagina- 
tion, and  half-understood  theology. 

Book  V.  commences  the  list  of  heretics — Naasseni,  Peratse, 
Sethites,  and  Justin.  Book  VI.  comprises  Simon  Magus, 
Valentinus,  whose  system  he  traces  to  Plato  and  the  Pytha- 
goreans, Secundus,  Ptolemseus  and  Heracleon,  of  the  same 
school;  Marcus  and  Colarbasus,  of  magical  proclivities. 
The  account  of  Simon  Magus  is  very  explicit,  showing  how 
he  pressed  not  only  Scripture  but  heathen  legend  into 
the  service  of  his  insane  ambition ;  that  of  the  Yalentinians 
is  to  a  great  extent  drawn  from  Ireuceus,  as  also  is  that  of 
Marcus.  Book  VII.  is  devoted  mainly  to  the  great  heresi- 
archs  Basilides  and  Marcion,  the  former  being  discussed  at 
considerable  length,  and  supplying  valuable  material  to  the 
critic.  The  eighth  book  is  occupied  with  a  variety  of  doc- 
trines, the  most  important  being  that  of  the  Montanists. 
The  ninth  book  begins  with  an  account  of  the  heresy  of 
Noetus ;  this  is  made  the  peg  on  which  to  hang  the 
chronicle  of  Callistus  and  his  misdeeds,  already  recounted.^ 
Next  come  the  Judieo-Christian  sects,  Elchasaites,  Essenes, 
Pharisees  and  Saddueees.'^ 

^  Chapters  ii.-xvii. 

-  The  Ebionites  are  mentioned  in  Book  VII.,  ^^•ith  Cerinthus  and 
Carpocrates,  as  infected  with  Egyptian  teaching. 


4i6  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

The  tenth  book  gives  a  brief  recapitulation  of  the  preced- 
ing (except  books  iii.  and  iv.),  and  then  proceeds  to  lay  down 
a  system  of  Jewish  chronology,  and  a  short  sketch  of  the 
Catholic  doctrine,  and  concludes  with  a  hortatory  epilogue. 

The  list  of  heresies,  though  not  absolutely  exhaustive,  is 
very  conii)lete,  and  the  treatment  is  fairly  unifornL  Its 
great  merit  is  that  of  making  the  writers  speak  for  them- 
selves, abundant  quotations  from  the  original  sources  being 
introduced.  Occasionally  an  ambiguity  arises  from  the  use 
of  the  phrase  "  he  says,"  sometimes  of  the  master,  sometimes 
of  one  of  his  disciples ;  but  on  the  whole  the  citations  may 
be  received  with  confidence,  and  are,  of  course,  most  valuable 
data  for  arriving  at  the  facts.  The  obstinate  resolve  to  see 
in  every  heretic  a  copy  of  some  heathen  thinker  detracts 
greatly  from  the  critical  value  of  the  book,  e.g.,  Noetus 
borrows  from  Heraclitus,  Marcus  from  Pythagoras,  the 
Encratites  from  the  Gymnosophists,  &c.  Nevertheless,  the 
grand  })rinciple  that  heresy  arises  from  a  contaminati(jn  of 
tlie  faith  with  heathen  elements  is  highly  important,  and  the 
writer  deserves  our  thanks  for  the  careful  manner  in  which 
he  has  Ijrought  it  out.  There  is  no  attempt  at  eloquence  or, 
indeed,  at  style  of  any  kind ;  nor,  except  in  the  few  closing 
paragraphs,  is  any  constructive  theology  introduced.  The 
work  is  essentially  the  production  of  a  student,  who  finds 
his  vocation  rather  in  amassing  materials  for  synthetic  treat- 
ment by  others  than  in  elaborating  a  system  of  his  own. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  this  work  on  heresies  is  not 
included  in  the  list  of  his  writings  on  the  Chair.  The  reason 
no  doubt  is  that  it  contains  the  account  of  his  diflerence  with 
the  rop(\s.  Probably  it  was  agreed  to  be  forgotten.  The  list 
on  the  Chair,  conjecturally  restored  in  parts,  is  as  follows : — 
(i)  Against  the  Jews ;  (2)  On  Virginity  ;  (3)  On  the  Psalms: 
(4)  On  the  Ventriloquist,  i.e.,  the  Witcli  of  Endor,  or  per- 
liaps  the  Spirit  of  Divination  mentioned  in  the  Acts;  (5) 
Defence  of  the  Gospel  according  to  8.  John,  and  his  Aj^oca- 
lypse;  (6)  On  Spiritual  Gifts;  (7)  Apostolic  Tradition; 
(8)  C'hronicles  or  Chronology;  (9)  Against  the  Greeks; 
(10)  Against  l*lato,  probably  tlie  same  wiih  A  Treatise  on  the 


HIPPOLYTUS.  417 

All;  (11)  A  Hortatory  Address  to  Severina ;  ^  (12)  Demon- 
stration of  the  Time  of  the  Paschal  Feast  according?  to  the 
Order  in  the  Table ;    (13)  Hymns  on  all  the  Scriptures ;  2 

(14)  Concerning   God  and  the  Eesurrection  of   the  Flesh ; 

(15)  Concerning  the  Good  and  the  Origin  of  Evil. 

To  this  list  must  be  added  several  other  treatises,  known 
either  from  allusions  in  the  FJiilosophumena  or  from  later 
sources.  He  wrote  commentaries  on  many  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  on  three  of  the  New.  His  favourite  study 
was  the  book  of  Daniel.  From  this  and  the  Apocalypse  he 
drew  those  millennial  views  which,  though  not  avowed  in  his 
extant  works,  there  is  little  doubt  he  held. 

An  early  work,  Against  Thirty -two  Heresies,  is  mentioned 
by  Photius ;  it  was  chiefly  a  synopsis  of  information  derived 
from  the  lectures  of  Irenseus.  Probably  the  short  extant 
work  Against  Noetits  was  the  last  section  of  it. 

Photius  also  mentions  a  book  of  his  called  The  Labyrinth, 
which  has  been  shown  to  be  no  separate  work,  but  simply 
the  tenth  book  of  the  Philosophiimena,  which  commences  with 
the  words,  "  The  Labyrinth  of  Heresies,"  and  was  doubtless 
intended  by  Hippolytus  to  be  used  separately,  as  a  short 
handbook  of  heresiology. 

The  work  on  the  Paschal  cycle  enjoyed  great  credit  for  a 
while ;  but  as  its  computations  were  only  valid  for  thirty- 
two  years,  it  soon  fell  out  of  date.  The  fact  that  it  is  still 
recommended  for  practical  use  on  the  statue  proves  the 
inscription  to  be  contemporaneous. 

The  two  features  in  S.  Hippolytus'  teaching  which  failed 
to  satisfy  the  orthodox  were,  first,  his  Chiliasm ;  secondly, 
his  Christology.  The  former  he  shares  with  Irenjeus  and 
Tertullian,  being  intermediate  in  his  views  between  the  two. 
He  is  of  opinion  that  the  reign  of  the  saints  on  earth  will 
commence  about  a.d.  500,  which,  according  to  his  computa- 
tion, will  conclude  the  six  thousandth  year  of  the  world. 
His  doctrine  of  the  generation  of  the  Logos  w\as  a  far  more 

^  Possibly  the  Empress  Severa,  second  wife  of  Elagabalus. 
-  ciSat,  possibly  not  to  be  taken  strictly  as  hymns,  but  merely  verses  to 
be  recited  and  committed  to  memory. 

2  D 


4i8  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

serious  matter,  and,  as  has  already  been  said,  hiid  liiin  open  to 
the  charge  of  ditheism.  lie  himself  was  greatly  hurt  at  the 
suspicion  of  unorthodoxy.  It  is  more  probable  that  his 
meta})hysic  was  defective,  than  that  his  belief  in  the  eternity 
of  the  Logos  was  unsound.  It  is  clear  that  his  culture  was 
wide  rather  than  deep,  and  his  learning  more  conspicuous 
than  his  power  of  thought.  The  extent  of  his  erudition  is 
remarkable,  and  in  excess  of  any  of  his  predecessors.  It 
combined  subjects  so  different  as  philosophy,  magic,  astro- 
logy. Scripture,  dogmatic  theology,  chronology,  astronomical 
and  historical,  as  well  as  (probably)  the  criticism  and  sifting 
of  Biblical  tradition.  His  death  in  the  mines  was  probably 
considered  as  blotting  out  the  memory  of  his  errors ;  and  it  is 
in  thorough  accordance  with  the  statesmanlike  policy  of  the 
Itoman  Church,  and  immensely  to  her  credit,  that  she  should 
have  overlooked  his  contumacy  and  appropriated  to  herself 
the  honour  of  his  great  name,  by  conferring  upon  him  the 
j^lorious  title  of  saint. 


Caius  the  Presbyter. 

A  few  words  must  be  said  about  Caius  the  Eoman  Presby- 
ter, to  whom  Eusebius  attributes  a  Dialogue  or  Disputation 
with  Troclus,  a  Montanistic  leader,  from  which  he  quotes 
several  passages.  He  seems  to  have  played  an  important 
part  in  the  Uoman  Church  during  the  time  of  Hi})polytus, 
but  the  notices  of  his  writings  are  so  mixed  up  witli  those 
of  Hippolytus  that  some  critics,  and  Lightfoot  among 
them,  are  inclined  to  regard  him  as  altogether  a  mythical 
personage,  and  probably  a  mere  double  of  Hippolytus,  whose 
pnenomen  may  possibly  have  been  Caius  and  so  have  led  to 
the  confusion.  Certain  it  is  that  almost  every  one  of  the 
Works  wliich  are  now  with  toleraljle  unanimity  ascribed  to 
Hipl)olytus,  have  been  either  by  ancient  or  modern  critics 
ascribed  also  to  him.  The  only  ones  that  seem  to  stand 
apart  and  to  vindicate  for  Caius  a  scjiarate  ])ersonality  are 
the  Dialogue  named  above,  and  a  woik  (ailed  the  "Little 
Labyrinth,"  quoted  by  Eusebius,  which   Lightfoot  identifies 


VICTOR.  419 

with  a  treatise  against  the  heresy  of  Artemon.  Doubt  has 
been  thrown,  however,  even  upon  these.  Lightfoot  suggests 
that  the  name  Gains  may  simply  have  been  that  of  the  chief 
interlocutor  in  the  Dialogue,  whom  Eusebius  supposed  to 
have  been  a  real  person,  and,  by  a  correct  comparison  of 
cross-references,  credited  with  a  large  number  of  other  writ- 
ings which  really  belonged  to  Ilippolytus.  It  is  impossible 
to  be  quite  certain  where  the  learned  disagree.  But  it  seems 
best  on  the  whole  to  suppose  that  Caius  was  an  historical 
person,  who  wrote  at  Eome  on  subjects  similar  to  those 
treated  of  by  Hippolytus,  and  among  other  things  came 
forward  as  an  opponent  of  Chiliasm,  which  is  the  best 
ground  for  distinguishing  him  from  Hippolytus,  for  the 
latter,  so  far  from  combating  Chiliastic  theories,  sympathised 
very  warmly  with  them. 

Victor,  the  Roman  Bishop. 

While  on  the  subject  of  the  Roman  Church,  we  may  refer 
for  a  moment  to  its  bishop  Victor,  whom  we  have  already 
mentioned  as  the  first  to  assert,  on  behalf  of  his  see,  that 
claim  to  superior  authority  in  the  Church  at  large  which  his 
successors  so  ably  carried  to  its  completion.  This  remark- 
able man  was  also  the  first  ecclesiastical  writer  who  employed 
the  Latin  language  for  controversial  purposes.  S.  Jerome 
ascribes  to  him  a  few  slight  works,  the  best  known  being 
one  on  the  Paschal  controversy.^  These  have  all  perished. 
Harnack  is  also  disposed  to  regard  him  as  the  author  of  the 
treatise  against  gambling,^  printed  at  the  end  of  Cyprian's 
works.  This,  however,  is  very  doubtful.  In  any  case,  his 
literary  character  is  thrown  into  the  shade  by  his  admini- 
strative qualities.  From  this  point  of  view  he  is  a  notable 
figure  in  Church  history,  being  the  true  precursor  of  that  long 
line  of  ecclesiastical  statesmen  who  in  process  of  time  raised 
the  Papacy  to  the  position  of  tyrant  of  the  human  race.    In  him 

^  Jerome,  Vir.  III.  34,  42,  who  also  mentions  a  senator  named  Apol- 
lonius  as  the  author,  under  Commodus,  of  a  Latin  defence  of  Christianity, 
which  he  read  to  the  assembled  senate. 

-  Adversus  aleatores. 


420  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

the  historiiin  descries  the  ideal  pontiff,  a  type  realised  again 
and  ai^'ain,  and  almost  always  bearing  the  same  lineaments. 
In  origin  obscure,  raised  from  the  crowd  Ijy  merit  alone  to  a 
height  almost  superhuman,  he  at  once  vindicates  and  refutes 
the  equality  of  mankind.  Trained  in  reverence  for  tradi- 
tion, he  tramples  upon  tradition,  even  that  of  an  Apostle,  if 
it  presumes  to  make  against  his  own  custom,  forcing  every 
form  of  outward  inconsistency  to  bend  to  the  inner  consis- 
tency of  an  aim  steadfastly  pursued ;  honouring  learning, 
but  rewarding  obsequiousness ;  fearing  scandal,  but  respect- 
ing ability  none  the  less  because  unscrupulous,  and  utilising 
rather  than  provoking  it — a  man  of  courage  and  real  in- 
tegrity, but  led  by  his  imperious  temper  into  error  which  yet 
he  was  wise  enough  to  retract :  above  all  things,  a  statesman 
and  a  ruler,  who  advanced  what  to  his  limited  understanding 
seemed  the  kingdom  of  Crod  with  inflexible  decision ;  and 
left  it  to  higher  and  purer  spirits  to  regret  what  ordinary 
minds  hail  as  the  best  evidence  of  a  good  cause,  namely,  the 
establishment  of  a  precedent  which  could  be  carried  through 
centuries  of  effort  to  the  pinnacle  of  complete  success. 

Some  other  Writers  of  the  Same  School. 

The  (Jricco-liuman  school  of  theology,  under  which  we 
have  included  Irena;us,  Hippolytus,  and  Caius,  is  so  named 
because  it  exhibits  points  of  affinity  witli  both  divisions  of 
the  Catholic  Cliurch.  While  Irena^us  in  Gaul  perpetuates 
the  traditions  of  S.  John's  teaching  in  Asia,  and  Hippolytus, 
l>y  his  scientific  exactness  in  pourtraying  the  doctrines  of  the 
heretics,  and  tracing  each  to  its  heathen  source,  displays  the 
characteristics  of  the  Hellenic  intellect,  both  of  them  are 
largely  infhienced  l)y  tlie  peculiar  type  of  Christianity  wliich 
was  rapidly  l^ecoming  predominant  at  Kome,  namely,  strong 
dogmatic  conservatism,  joined  with  remarkable  aptitude  for 
<  hurch  organisation.  Tlie  various  minor  liglits  that  during 
the  same  period  glistencil  in  the  Christian  sky  are  of  less 
manysided  lustre.  Some  of  them  belong  exclusively  to 
the   OroDco- Asiatic   ty])e    of    Christianity,   others  almost  as 


RHODON.  421 

exclusively  to  the  Western ;  but,  on  the  whole,  they  deserve 
to  be  classed  together  as  exemplifying  the  plain  orthodox 
point  of  view,  equally  removed  from  the  brilliant  philoso- 
phising of  Alexandria  and  the  powerful  though  narrow 
rhetoric  of  the  African  school.  Their  works  have  perished, 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  scanty  fragments,  and  these  we 
shall  proceed  to  notice.^ 

First  in  time  comes  Rhodon,  of  whom  Eusebius  reports  ^ 
that  he  was  an  Asiatic  by  birth,  and  came  to  Kome,  where 
he  fell  under  the  influence  of  Tatian.  His  literary  activity 
belongs  to  the  reign  of  Commodus  (a.d.  180-192).  He  was 
a  tolerably  prolific  writer,  his  chief  energies  being  directed 
against  the  heresy  of  Marcion,  and  in  particular  that  aspect 
of  it  which  was  represented  l)y  the  teaching  of  Apelles.  The 
picture  he  gives  of  the  old  age  of  the  latter  is  very  pleasing. 
Firm  in  his  own  opinion,  though  tolerant  of  those  of  others, 
Apelles  saw  more  clearly  than  Ehodon  that  the  essence  of 
Christianity  is  not  speculation  but  practice. 

*'The  old  man,"  says  Rhodon,  "when  I  conversed  with  him, 
was  convicted  of  uttering  many  wrong  statements.  For  instance, 
he  declared  it  unnecessary  to  investigate  the  basis  of  the  faith, 
but  thought  it  best  for  each  to  remain  in  that  form  of  it  in  which 
he  had  been  brought  up.  His  idea  was  that  all  would  be  saved 
who  had  trusted  in  the  Crucified,  on  the  condition  that  they  were 
found  in  good  works." 

Their  conversation  then  turned  on  the  unity  of  the  God- 
head, and  how  it  was  cognisable.  Here  Apelles  took  his 
stand  on  the  limitation  of  the  human  mind,  which  made  such 
abstruse  subjects  impossible  to  be  apprehended  by  the  reason. 
Nevertheless,  he  declared  himself  satisfied  of  the  Divine 
unity.     Ithodon  thus  continues  : — 

"  On  my  pressing  him  for  a  demonstration,  and  asking  how 
he  was  able  to  assert  his  view  with  so  much  conlidence,  he  re- 
pUed  that  the  prophecies  were  self-refuting,   inasmuch  as  their 

1  For  these  fragments,  as  well  as  all  the  others  noticed  in  this  book,  tlie 
reader  is  once  for  all  referred  to  Routlrs  licliqukc  Sacrcv. 

2  H.  E.  V.  13. 


422  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

statements  were  not  true,  being  inconsistent,  deceptive,  and  self- 
contradictory.  Why  tliere  should  be  but  one  source  of  Godhead 
lie  professed  ho  did  not  know,  but  felt  iiresistibly  compelled  to 
believe  it.  On  my  adjuring  him  to  speak  the  truth,  he  declared 
on  oath  that  he  meant  what  he  said  ;  that  he  did  not  know  in 
what  way  CJod  is  unl)egotten,  but  that  he  believed  Him  so  to  be. 
T  then  ridiculed  him,  and  convictod  him  of  professing  to  be  a 
teacher  of  others  without  himself  knowing  the  grounds  of  what 
lie  taught." 

Eusebius  mentions  also  a  work  of  IJhodon's,  in  which  he 
l)r()posed  solutions  of  obscure  Scripture  problems  tabulated 
by  Tatian  ;  as  well  as  a  series  of  notes  on  the  six  days'  work 
of  creation.  It  is  possil)le  that  he  was  also  the  writer  of  the 
anonymous  treatise  in  three  books  against  the  Montanists 
addressed  to  Avircius  Marcellus,  which  was  also  ascribed  to 
Apollinaris  and  Apollonius.^ 

To  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Conmiodus  belongs 
Serapion,  Bishop  of  Antioch  (a.d.  190),  from  whose  epistle 
In  Caricus  and  Pontius,  on  the  subject  of  Montanism,  a  few 
fragments  are  preserved.  Other  epistles  of  his  are  alluded 
to  by  Eusebius.  The  only  work  of  Serapion  that  has  much 
interest  for  us  is  a  treatise  on  the  so-called  Gospel  of  Peter, 
written  at  the  request  of  some  presbyters  of  Phossus,  in 
which  city  it  seems  to  have  been  used  with  disastrous 
eflects  on  orthodoxy.  The  following  fragment  is  given  by 
Eusebius :  - — 

**  \\'«',  my  brcthivn,  receive  Peter  and  the  otlier  Apostles  as 
we  do  Christ.  ]]ut  the  works  that  are  falsely  attributed  to  them 
we  reject,  knowing  what  they  are,  and  that  we  have  not  received 
such  things.  For  when  I  was  with  you,  I  thought  you  all  held 
the  right  faith  ;  and  not  having  then  read  the  Gospel  in."scribed 
witli  tlie  name  of  Peter,  I  said,  '  If  this  be  the  only  cause  of  your 
disagreement,  let  it  bo  read.'  But  now,  having  found  out  that 
the  minds  of  those  men  were  secretly  brooding  over  heresy,  from 
what  was  told  me,  I  shall  hasten  to  come  to  you.     So,  my  brethren, 

'  Sec  Ens.  II.  E.  V.  iC,  17. 

-  For  tlic-sc  fragments  sic  Ens.  H.  E,  v.  19  and  vi,  12,  and  on  the  Gospel 
of  I'etcr  sec  back,  pp.  163  9(j>j. 


.     APOLLONIUS.  423 

expect  me  shortly.  But  when  we  shall  have  discovered  to  what 
sect  Marcianus  belonged,  inconsistent  as  he  was  with  himself  and 
not  understanding  what  he  talked  about,  ye  shall  learn  all  these 
things  from  what  was  written  you.  For  we  have  been  able  to 
borrow  this  book  and  read  it  carefully  through,  having  procured 
it  from  others  who  used  it  (successors  of  those  who  went  before 
MarcianuSji  Docetae  as  they  are  called,  from  whom  he  took  his 
views).  And  we  have  found  that  a  considerable  portion  of  it 
gives  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Saviour,  but  that  certain  additions 
are  made  in  the  form  of  injunctions,  concerning  which  we  have 
instructed  you." 

We  can  easily  understand  the  anxiety  felt  by  the  bishops 
about  these  plausible  figments  under  apostolic  names,  which, 
by  mixing  heretical  views  with  genuine  tradition,  often  suc- 
ceeded in  winning  a  place  in  public  worship.  The  Gnostics 
generally  selected  some  one  Apostle  on  whom  they  fathered 
their  peculiar  interpretations.  The  Church,  on  the  contrary, 
emphasised  the  common  teaching  of  all  the  Apostles,  and 
refused  to  recognise  any  tradition  that  purported  to  come 
through  an  individual  channel,  however  authoritative.  Sera- 
pion  was  a  man  of  considerable  influence,  not  only  from  his 
activity  and  learning,  but  also  from  the  rigorous  asceticism 
of  his  life. 

Another  Asiatic  writer  of  some  importance  was  Apollonius, 
who  is  described  as  Bishop  of  Ephesus  by  a  late  writer,  but 
the  silence  of  Eusebius  makes  this  very  doubtful.  His  chief 
work  was  a  treatise  in  five  books  against  the  Cataphrygians, 
i.e.,  the  Montanists.  Eusebius  gives  a.d.  172  as  the  date  of 
the  rise  of  the  New  Prophecy.  Apollonius  writes  forty  years 
after  this  event.  A  writer  named  Zoticus  had  attempted 
to  withstand  the  influence  of  the  prophetesses  Prisca  and 
Maximilla  in  the  Phrygian  townlets  where  their  preaching 
had  begun,  but  without  success.-     The  people  were  too  in- 

1  Who  Marcianus  was  is  uncertain,  perhaps  the  same  as  Marcus.  Mr. 
Robinson  would  read  Marcion. 

-  More  will  be  found  about  Montanus  and  his  sect  in  the  chapter  on 
Tertullian.  Among  other  vagaries,  he  had  pitched  upon  two  Phrygian 
hamlets,  Pepuza  and  Tvmium,  as  seats  of  the  New  Prophecy,  and  had 


424  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

fatuated  to  listen  to  ar[,nament,  or  even  to  the  plainest  proofs 
of  imposture.  Apollonius  attempted  the  same  th.'inkless 
task  with  more  talent  for  satire,  and  apparently  with  better 
results,  as  Eusebius  has  thouj^^ht  it  worth  while  to  give  some 
rather  long  extracts  from  his  book.  As  they  are  not  unin- 
structive  evidence  of  the  wilful  blindness  of  sectarian  par- 
tisanship, we  subjoin  a  translation  of  them  made  by  an  old 
Eusebian  scholar,  Dr.  Meredith  Hanmer,  whose  racy  English 
well  reproduces  the  smartness  of  the  original : — 

"But  what  kind  of  new  Doctor  this  is  his  works  and  di^ctrine 
do  declare.  This  is  he  who  taught  the  breaking,'  of  wedlock,  who 
ordained  toll-gatherers  and  money-levies.  This  is  he  who  under 
pretence  of  oblations  has  cunningly  invented  a  new  art  of 
bribery ;  this  is  lie  which  giveth  great  hire  unto  the  preachers 
of  his  doctrine,  that  by  feeding  of  the  paunch  his  prophecies 
may  prevaile." 

Of  the  prophetess  Maximilla  and  the  other  "spiritual 
dames,"  he  writes  : — 

"  We  have  before  showed  those  first  prophetesses,  from  the 
time  they  were  fdled  with  their  false  spirit,  to  have  forsaken  their 
husbands.  'J'hon  how  shamefully  do  they  lie,  callini,'  Priscilla  a 
virgin  !  Again,  doth  not  the  whole  Scripture  forbid  that  a  pro- 
phet should  receive  rewards  and  money  ?  When  I  see  a  prophetess 
seeking;  gold  and  silver  and  precious  garments,  how  can  I  choose 
but  reprobate  her  ?  " 

Of  Themison  he  says  : — 

"Themison,  also,  inllained  with  the  burning  thirst  of  covetous- 
ness,  tasted  not  the  sharp  experience  of  ct)nfession  before  the 
tyrant,  but  shifted  liimself  out  of  fetters  with  large  money.  And 
when  for  this  cause  he  should  have  humbled  himself,  yet  he  in  all 

declared  one  or  both  to  be  the  New  Jerusalem.  Win  n  the  writer  vi.sited 
Salt  Lake  City  in  1872,  and  attended  worship  in  the  temple  tliere,  he 
was  hurjjri.sed  to  hear,  in  the  Mormon  jirofession  of  Faith,  an  addition  to 
the  Apostles'  Creed  of  the  word.s,  "  I  believe  that  the  New  Jerusalem  will 
bo  established  on  tliis  continent."  And  the  i)resident  in  hi^  haranjjue 
more  than  once  spoke  of  his  city  as  the  true  Jerusalem.  Thus  history 
rejjcats  itself  1 


APOLLONIUS.  425 

braggery,  as  if  forsooth  he  were  a  martyr/  in  his  vain  conceit 
writes  a  catholic  epistle  to  instruct  them  that  believed  better 
than  himself,  and  to  exhort  them  to  strive  for  the  new  doctrine, 
and  together  mth  him  to  revile  the  Lord  and  His  Apostles  and 
Holy  Church." 

And  again : — 

"But  that  we  trouble  not  ourselves  with  so  many,  let  the 
prophetess  tell  us  touching  Alexander,  who  called  himself  a 
martyr,  with  whom  she  hath  banqueted,  whom  also  many  do 
adore,  whose  thefts  and  other  heinous  crimes  for  which  he  hath 
suffered  punishment  I  will  not  now  rehearse,  seeing  they  are  in 
the  public  registers.  And  whose  sins  hath  he  or  she  pardoned  ? 
Does  the  prophet  grant  grace  of  theft  to  the  martyr,  or  the 
martyr  grace  of  greed  unto  the  prophet  1  For  whereas  Christ 
commanded.  Ye  shall  not  possess  gold  nor  silver,  neither  two  coats, 
these  on  the  contrary  seek  after  the  possessing  of  unlawful  sub- 
stance. We  have  declared  how  they  who  are  called  prophets  and 
martyrs  have  extorted  money,  not  only  from  the  rich,  but  from  the 
poor,  the  fatherless  and  the  widow.  If  they  plead  not  guilty,  let  them 
stay  and  join  issue  with  us  in  this  matter,  on  this  understanding, 
that  if  they  be  overthrown,  they  Avill  at  least  from  henceforth 
refrain  from  committing  the  like  sins  again.  The  fruits  of  pro- 
phets are  to  be  tried.  The  tree  is  known  by  its  fruit.  And  that 
the  fruit  of  Alexander  may  be  known  of  such  as  desire  it,  he 
was  condemned  at  Ephesus  by  ^milius  Frontinus,  not  for  his 
Christian  profession,  but  for  presumptuous  and  boldly  enterprised 
theft,  being  an  altogether  lewd  person." 

And  in  another  portion  of  the  same  book : — 

*'If  they  deny  their  prophets  to  be  receivers  of  gifts,  let  them 
say  so,  only  on  the  condition  that  if  it  be  proved,  they  be  no 
longer  prophets.  Hereof  we  are  able  to  allege  many  particular 
proofs.  All  the  works  of  a  prophet  are  necessarily  to  be  proved. 
Tell  me,  I  beseech  you,  is  it  seemly  for  a  prophet  to  paint  1  is  it 
seemly  for  a  prophet  to  smooth  his  complexion  with  cosmetics  ? 
is  it  seemly  for  a  prophet  to  pink  and  gingerly  to  set  forth  him- 
self ?  is  it  seemly  for  a  prophet  to  dice  and  carde  1   is  it  seemly 

1  Themison  seems  to  have  been  an  exception  to  the  rule  of  Montanist 
enthusiasm.     Generally  they  were  forward  to  suffer  martyrdom. 


426  THE  APOLOGISTS. 

for  a  prophet  to  be  an  usurer?  Let  them  answer  me  whether 
these  things  he  lawful  or  unlawful.  I  will  prove  them  to  be  tlieir 
practice."  ^ 

It  a])p('ars  that  this  attack  was  sufficiently  important  to 
demand  an  answer  from  TertuUian,  which  was  given  in  llic 
Rovcnth  book  of  his  (lost)  work  upon  Ecstacy. 

^  See  Eu.s.  J  I.  E.  V.  iS. 


BOOK  IV. 

THE    ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL    OF 
THEOLOGY. 

(a.d.  175-300.) 


CHAPTEE  I. 

THE  ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Up  to  this  point  of  our  history  the  capital  of  Egypt  has  been 
associated  mainly  with  the  rise  of  heretical  teaching.  We  have 
now  to  consider  it  from  a  more  pleasing  point  of  view,  as  the 
metropolis  of  Christian  speculative  thought.  For  a  century 
and  a  half  it  well  deserved  this  proud  title.  From  the  time 
when  the  Stoic  Pantsenus  taught  the  conformity  of  Christ's 
revelation  with  the  highest  human  reason  in  the  newly- 
founded  Catechetical  school,  till  that  day  when  S.  Athanasius 
closed  his  heroic  life  of  conflict  for  the  true  Godhead  of  the  Son 
in  the  great  arena  of  Christendom,  the  destinies  of  scientific 
religion  were  committed  to  the  keeping  of  a  single  city. 

It  will  be  necessary  to  state  as  briefly  and  as  clearly  as 
possible  the  mental  and  spiritual  surroundings  in  which  these 
champions  of  the  faith  arose. 

In  the  first  place,  we  must  emphasise  the  fact  that 
Alexandria  was  in  a  far  greater  degree  than  Eome  a  genuinely 
cosmopolitan  city.  All  the  leading  nationalities  met  there, 
and  all  contributed  something  towards  its  peculiar  type  of 
Christianity.  Among  them  three  were  pre-eminent.  First 
there  was  the  native  Egyptian,  with  his  deep  sense  of  the 
underlying  mystery  of  existence,  and  his  constant  tendency 
to  allegoric  symbolism.  Next  there  was  the  Greek,  with  his 
passion  for  logic  and  system,  and  his  inimitable  precision  of 
thought.  Thirdly,  there  was  the  Oriental  element,  with  its 
oppressive  consciousness  of  the  power  of  evil  and  its  wild 
but  imaginative  gnosis. 

In  the  master-thoughts  of  the  Alexandrian  divines  all  that 

was  permanent  in  these  influences  found  a  place.     And  to 

them  must  be  added  yet  another  element,  hardly  if  at  all 

429 


430         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

less  important,  nainely,  the  spiritualised  Judaism  of  Philo. 
That  powerful  thinker  had  softened  the  antithesis  between 
Jewish  revelation  and  l*agan  philosophy,  and  while  retaining 
to  tlie  last  the  admiring  reverence  of  his  co-religionists,  had 
really  destroyed  that  exclusiveness  on  which  they  built 
their  pre-eminence.  After  him  it  was  no  longer  impossible 
to  co-ordinate  Judaism  with  the  best  religious  thought  of 
heathenism  on  the  one  hand,  and  with  a  comprehensive 
scheme  of  Christian  philosophy  on  the  other. 

The  second  point  to  emphasise  is  the  fact  that  for  the 
tirst  lime  in  human  history  thought  was  absolutely  free.  It 
was  no  accident  that  Alexandria  witnessed  the  growth  of  a 
liberal  Catholic  theology.  Nowhere  else  could  the  Christian 
thinker  find  himself  face  to  face  with  all  the  ripest  develop- 
ments of  the  human  mind,  and  attempt  unhindered  the  task 
of  reconciling  them  with  revealed  truth. 

The  atmosphere  of  the  place  was  essentially  intellectual. 
Men  lived  only  for  science,  for  discussion  and  for  letters.  Xo 
opinions  were  too  extravagant,  provided  only  they  were  ably 
propounded :  no  inconsistencies  too  glaring,  provided  they 
were  dove- tailed  into  a  system  by  some  subtle  process  of 
harmonisation.  The  prevailing  tendency  was  towards  uni- 
versal inclusion — either  by  eclecticism,  i.e.,  the  juxtaposition 
of  thoughts  culled  from  many  systems ;  or  by  syncretism,  i.e., 
the  fusion  into  one  system  of  elements  borrowed  from  many. 

If  Christianity  was  to  succeed  in  holding  its  own  among 
so  vast  a  host  of  competitors,  it  must  be  either  by  showing 
that  it  possessed  the  key  by  which  their  results  might  be  in- 
terpreted, or  by  including  their  partial  truths  in  a  fuller  and 
more  universal  truth  of  its  own.  Never  perhaps  has  the 
free  statement  of  the  Christian  idea  had  less  prejudice  to 
encounter  than  at  Alexandria  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century.  Never  has  it  more  successfully  vindicated  by  argu- 
ment its  right  to  be  the  great  interpreter  of  the  human  spirit.^ 

'  It  is  indeed  most  refreshing  to  observe  the  utter  absence  of  the  }HirU 
pris  spirit  in  Clement.  He  is  quite  free  from  that  ultra-apolojjjitic  attitude 
which  seems  to  think  that,  because  it  takes  the  Christian  side,  it  must  be 
suspected  of  disingenuousness.  He  reasons  with  heathens  naturally,  as 
an  equal. 


THE  CATECHETICAL  SCHOOL.  431 

The  institutions  of  the  great  metropolis  were  highly 
favourable  to  this  result.  The  ]\Iuseum,  built  by  the  Ptole- 
mies, was  intended  to  be,  and  speedily  became,  the  centre  of 
an  intense  intellectual  life.  The  Serapeum,  at  the  other  end 
of  the  town,  rivalled  it  in  beauty  of  architecture  and  wealth 
of  rare  MSS.  The  Sebastion,  reared  in  honour  of  Augustus, 
was  no  unworthy  companion  to  these  two  noble  establish- 
ments. In  all  three,  splendid  endowments  and  a  rich  pro- 
fessoriate attracted  the  talent  of  the  world.  If  the  ambition 
of  a  secured  reputation  drew  many  eminent  men  away  to 
Rome,  the  means  of  securing  such  eminence  were  mainly 
procured  at  Alexandria.  It  was  there  that  the  ordeal  of 
intellectual  competition  had  to  be  faced ;  and  it  was  there, 
after  all,  that  the  prizes  most  dear  to  the  philosophic  spirit 
could  alone  be  obtained. 

The  Christian  Church  in  this  city  rose  to  the  height  of 
its  grand  opportunity.  It  entered  the  lists  without  fear 
and  without  favour,  and  boldly  proclaimed  its  competence  to 
satisfy  the  intellectual  cravings  of  man.  Numbers  of  restless 
and  inquiring  spirits  came  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  hoping 
to  find  a  solution  of  the  doubts  that  perplexed  them.  And 
the  Church,  which  had  already  brought  peace  to  the  souls  of 
the  woman  and  the  slave,  now  girded  herself  to  the  harder  task 
of  convincing  the  trained  intelligence  of  the  man  of  letters  and 
the  philosopher. 

The  Catechetical  School. 

She  did  this  by  her  time-honoured  system  of  Catechesis. 
From  the  earliest  dawn  of  Christianity,  the  greatest  atten- 
tion had  been  paid  to  the  instruction  of  converts  preparatory 
to  baptism.  They  were  made  to  understand  clearly  what 
they  were  surrendering,  and  what  they  were  adopting  in  its 
stead.  In  the  majority  of  cases  nothing  could  be  simpler 
than  this  process.  Wliile  thorough  and  fundamental,  it  was 
straightforward,  and  involved  no  sul^tilty  of  argument.  It 
consisted,  firstly,  in  the  repudiation  of  all  heathen  supersti- 
tions, and  secondly,  in  a  brief  profession  of  the  essentials  of 
Christian  belief.     The  catechumen  was,  of  course,  carefully 


432  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

trained  in  the  moral  duties  of  his  new  life,  ])ut  once  admitted 
to  baptism,  his  fiiith  was  protected  by  the  constant  inter- 
course of  his  fellow-lielievers,  and  the  absolute  severance 
from  all  his  former  associations. 

T>ut  in  the  case  of  the  intellectual  inquirer  a  much  more 
arduous  preparation  was  recjuired.  And  here  we  see  the 
elasticity  of  such  an  instrument  as  the  Catechetical  school. 
It  expanded  naturally  from  tlie  mere  instruction  of  catechu- 
mens in  the  elements  of  Christianity  to  a  dialectic  process, 
whereby  the  preliminary  ol)jections  to  the  Gospel  were  met 
and  refuted,  before  any  actual  doctrine  was  taught.  We  need 
not  connect  it  in  our  minds  with  any  immutable  organisation, 
nor  even  with  any  methodical  course  of  spiritual  training,  far 
less  witli  any  set  religious  dissertations.  The  purest  Christian 
tradition  liad  always  favoured  a  direct  connnunication  of  the 
truth  from  soul  to  soul.  The  teacher  whose  words  carried 
spiritual  power  bad  always  been  able  to  draw  around  him  a 
knot  of  reverent  listeners.  This,  as  we  learn  from  Tapias, 
was  the  case  with  the  Apostle  S.  John ;  it  was  the  case  also 
with  Polycarp,  and  afterwards  with  Justin.  And  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  these  precedents  were  followed  at  the 
commencement  of  the  Catechetical  school. 

Its  sco])e  afterwards  became  greatly  enlarged.  In  the 
time  of  Origen  and  probably  before  him,  numbers  of  uncon- 
verted heathens  and  many  baptized  Christians,  as  well  as 
cxitecliumens  pro])er,  were  included  in  its  ranks.  But  it 
nevertheless  retained  for  some  time  what  we  may  call  its 
unofficial  character.  Though  recognised  by  the  bishop,  it 
might  be  conducted  by  a  layman ;  though  attended  by 
crowds,  it  was  held  not  in  a  public  hall  at  a  set  time,  but 
in  the  catechist's  house  at  whatever  hour  suited  liim.  In 
all  these  respects  it  recalled  rather  the  ancient  schools  of 
philosophy  than  the  oflicial  (Iis])utations  (tf  the  contemporary 
academic  chairs. 

Moreover,  the  instruction  given  in  it  was  essentially  an 
act  of  devotion.  As  in  tlie  old  scliools,  it  was  given  gratis, 
and  wliorvcr  drsiicd,  man  or  woman,  ht'allien  (»r  C'liristian, 
was   made  welcome.     As   its  inthience  i:rew.  it   came  more 


THE  CATECHETICAL  SCHOOL.  433 

directly  under  the  control  of  the  bishop ;  but  to  the  last  it 
retained  a  certain  independence,  and  existed  side  by  side 
with  the  Church  organisation  as  a  sort  of  informal  Chair  of 
Apologetics,  embracing  in  that  domain,  as  Oxford  used  to  em- 
brace, the  studies  which  we  call  the  litcrae  Jmvianiorcs. 

The  first  head  of  this  school  whom  we  certainly  know  of 
was  a  converted  Stoic  philosopher  named  Pantaenus.  Before 
his  conversion  he  had  abandoned  Stoicism  for  the  eclectic 
Pythagoreanism  so  much  in  vogue  ;  but  his  Stoic  antecedents 
impressed  themselves  upon  his  Christianity ;  for  it  is  to  him 
that  we  owe  the  prominent  conception  of  the  immanent 
Deity  that  was  to  achieve  such  great  results  when  worked  out 
into  the  Logos-doctrine  of  Clement. 

Pant?enus  was  no  mere  intellectualist.  The  truths  of 
Christianity  once  grasped  filled  him  with  an  ardent  mis- 
sionary zeal.  He  preached  the  Gospel  in  the  furthest  East, 
in  Arabia,  and  even  in  India,  where  we  are  informed  he 
found  the  Aramaean  Gospel  of  S.  Matthew  in  use  among  a 
Christian  community.  We  know  not  when  he  returned  to 
Alexandria  to  undertake  the  task  to  which  he  devoted  his 
later  years:  probably  it  was  about  the  year  175.  Clement, 
who  arrived  before  1 80,  attached  himself  to  him,  and  has  no 
words  strong  enough  to  express  the  gratitude  he  felt  towards 
this  earnest  and  eloquent  teacher,  who  not  only  satisfied  his 
doubts,  but  gave  him  that  high  ideal  of  Christian  philosojDhy 
which  he  himself  raised  still  higher,  and  bequeathed  to  his 
own  successor  as  the  immortal  glory  of  the  Catechetical 
school. 

Before  proceeding  to  discuss  the  two  great  masters  that 
have  come  down  to  us,  a  few  preliminary  remarks  must  l)e 
made  on  the  movements  of  speculative  thought  in  the  non- 
Christian  world.  These  entered  so  largely  into  the  theology 
of  Clement  and  Origen  that  w^e  cannot  omit  to  refer  to  them. 

The  earliest  forms  of  Greek  speculation  sprung  directly 
out  of  that  primeval  nature-religion  which  Hellas  brought 
from  her  Aryan  home.  The  nearness  of  the  gods  to  man, 
and  their  familiar  presence  in  external  nature,  were  the 
root-conceptions  of  Greek  religion.     Hence  resulted  a  sunny 

2  E 


434  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

consciousnesH,  an  alMnindin^r  joy  of  life.  "  Everything,"  said 
Th{il(.'S,  "  is  full  of  gods."  The  sense  of  evil  was  not  oppres- 
sively felt.  The  natural  l)ent  was  towards  c)ptiniisni.  But 
a  change  came  over  tlu^  Greek  spirit.  The  revolution  in 
philosophy  effected  ])y  Socrates  corres})onded  to  an  inward 
change*  in  the  mode  of  regarding  Deity.  The  conception  of 
God  had  risen  immensely  in  greatness  and  in  jiurily;  and, 
simultaneously,  tlie  consciousness  of  moral  and  physical  evil 
had  l)ecome  intensified.  To  Plato  the  Divine  Perfection  is 
conceivecl  of  as  altogether  too  high  to  admit  of  a  realisation 
within  this  transitory  sphere.  The  existing  universe  is  at 
best  but  a  poor  copy  of  an  inmiaterial  archetype,  itself  the 
product  of  the  Divine  Mind.^  Thus  a  severance  was  effected 
between  God  and  man,  which  the  Aristotelian  metaphysic 
softened  down,  Init  did  not  succeed  in  brid<'inj4  over. 

In  the  third  century  before  Christ  the  Stoic  philosophy 
became  generally  diffused,  and  for  more  than  four  centuries 
prevailed  among  the  liiglicr  minds.  Stoicism  was  inferior  to 
Platonism  in  splendour  of  imagination  and  l)oldness  of  specu- 
lative insight,  but  it  represented  the  genuine  tradition  of  the 
Greek  religion,  into  which  Plato  had  im])orted  a  decided 
Oriental  element.  Essentially  pantheistic,  it  identified  Deity 
with  the  life-princii)le  of  the  material  universe,  and  regarded 
it  as  innnanent  in  the  entire  fabric  as  well  as  in  the  com- 
ponent parts.  The  soul  of  man  therefore  possessed  a  real 
affinity  witli  the  Divine,  and  its  essence  was  naturally  re- 
garded as  immortal.  But  the  Stoic  view  of  the  miivcrse  as 
the  domain  of  unvarying  law  was  fatal  to  tlie  admission  of 
human  freedom.-  Plan's  highest  good  consisted  in  identify- 
ing himself  al)Solutely  with  tlie  conditions  of  his  existence, 
which  rejtresented  the  law  of  his  lieing.  Evil  as  such  l)ecame 
non-existent.      Tt  iniglit  be  descrilied  from  one  point  of  view 

'  It  is  true  that  in  the  TimsDUS  Plato  attributes  the  fashioning  of  the 
Kosmos  to  the  Supreme  Deity  ;  but  in  the  Thca:fctus  the  o/jLoiuxTn  t^J  Qfii» 
is  declared  to  involve  tA  (pvytiy  iidtvbe  6ti  Tdxi<rra. 

-  The  Stoics  compared  our  illusory  sense  of  freedom  t«>  the  position  of 
a  dog  tied  behind  a  carriage.  If  he  realises  his  position,  ho  will  run 
<|iiietly  and  will  not  feel  the  chain,  but  if  he  resists,  he  will  hurt  himself, 


THE  CATECHETICAL  SCHOOL.  435 

as  ignorance ;  from  another,  as  good  not  yet  realised ;  from 
another,  as  the  necessary  sacrifice  of  the  part  to  the  whole. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  second  century  a.d.,  thoughtful 
men  throughout  the  world  were  deeply  affected  by  a  sense 
of  the  predominance  of  evil.  The  loss  of  all  stimulus  to 
effort,  the  oppressive  burdens  of  life,  and  the  widespread 
misery  which  prevailed, inclined  men's  minds  towards  a  system 
of  thought  which  should  embody  their  changed  convictions. 
They  naturally  turned  to  Plato,  who  alone  of  Greek  thinkers 
had  brought  into  strong  relief  the  inherent  imperfection  of 
the  visible  world.  But  Plato's  comprehensive  genius  had 
held  in  solution  two  opposing  tendencies.  One  was  strictly 
Hellenic,  aiming  at  the  supreme  good  by  contemplation  of 
the  ideas,  which  he  strove  to  render  intelligible  by  his  match- 
less dialectic ;  the  other  was  un- Greek  and  Oriental,  aiminsr 
at  an  explanation  of  existing  evil  by  a  theory  of  human  and 
animal  creation  through  intermediate  agencies  inferior  to  the 
Supreme  God.  It  was  this  latter  element  which  attracted 
the  Platonists  of  the  post- Christian  age.  Corrupting  the 
doctrines  of  the  Timaous,  and  fusing  them  with  theosophical 
speculations  from  the  remote  East,  they  produced  a  spurious 
Platonism  which  retained  just  enough  of  the  immortal  master's 
spirit  to  be  entitled  to  bear  his  name,  but  surrendered  almost 
all  the  highest  and  noblest  features  of  his  thought.^ 

and  be  dragged  on  just  the  same.    There  is  a  very  beautiful  prayer,  ascribed 
to  Cleanthes,  which  embodies  this  idea  : — 

"  "A70U  5e'  yU,'  cD  ZeO  koX  cvy   ibHeTrpcofxeprj, 

oiroL  TTod'  vfjuu  ei/xi  biaTerayixivos. 

ws  exj/o/ixai  7'  doKvos'  av  5k  firj  OeXo: 

KaKos  yepofxevos,  ov8ev  ^jttov  exI/o/uiaL.''' — Epict.  Man.  52. 
^  It  has  always  grieved  lovers  of  Plato  to  find  his  most  uncharacteristic 
elements  alone  identified  with  his  name,  as  was  the  case  in  Neo-Platonism, 
and  for  centuries  afterwards.  The  Timaeus,  from  which  alone  these  ele- 
ments were  derived,  is  by  no  means  the  portion  of  his  system  which  he 
himself  would  have  regarded  as  typical.  Full  of  interest  as  it  is,  and 
strikingly  as  it  appears  to  anticipate  points  of  Christian  belief,  it  lies  out- 
side the  true  centre  of  the  philosopher's  thought.  It  is  concerned  with 
the  sphere  of  the  hypothetical,  and  only  professes  to  supply  more  or  less 
probable  "  guesses  at  truth. "  But  the  confused  thinkers  of  a  later  age 
were  incapable  of  entering  into  the  region  of  pure,  non-mystical  dialectic, 
in  which  Plato,  when  most  himself,  delights  to  move. 


436         ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

The  Church  in  Alexandria  was  confronted  with  iliis  two- 
fold pliilosopliy.  On  the  one  hand,  it  met  the  groat  Stoic 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  immanence,  in  which,  with  clear  in- 
sight, it  recognised  an  ally ;  on  the  other,  it  saw  in  Plato's 
cosmogony,  and  still  more  in  his  moral  theory,  features  which 
seemed  closely  akin  to  revealed  truth. 

The  position  of  Plato  towards  Christianity  is  indeed  uniqua 
Alone  among  the  first  intellects  of  Greec^e,  he  is  spiritual  as 
truly  as  he  is  intellectual  His  philosophy  is  all  but  a  reli- 
gion. His  intense  yearning  after  the  Divine,  his  unconquer- 
able belief  that  God  is  good,  his  contempt  for  the  things  of 
sense,  his  clear  distinction  between  the  actual  and  the  ideal, 
his  piercing  insight  into  the  falsehoods  of  convention,  his 
bold  reconstruction  of  society,  his  moral  enthusiasm,  his 
perception  of  the  dignity  of  suffering,  his  prophetic  declara- 
tion that  when  a  perfectly  virtuous  man  appeared  he  would 
be  rejected  and  probably  crucified — all  these  were  not  merely 
points  of  contact  with  the  Christian  system,  but  seemed  so 
completely  to  breathe  its  spirit  as  almost  to  justify  the 
belief  that  Plato,  like  Abraham,  had  rejoiced  to  see  the  day 
of  Christ. 

And  so  the  Alexandrian  Fathers,  already  prepared  by  tlie 
Platonism  of  Philo,  threw  themselves  upon  Plato  as  by  a 
natural  instinct,  and  found  in  him  at  once  tlie  method  and 
instrument  of  union  between  divine  and  luinian  knowledge. 

P>ut  in  estimating  their  debt  to  Plato,  we  must  not  forget 
that  it  was  the  later  presentation  of  his  philosophy,  not  the 
genuine  Attic  original,  that  enchained  them.  Though,  with 
the  exception  of  Origen,  they  lived  before  the  rise  of  Neo- 
Platonism  properly  so  called,  their  affinity  with  the  eclectic 
syncretism  of  that  remarkable  system  is  too  striking  to  be 
ignonMl. 

The  Nco-Platonic  schcjol,  of  which  Anniioiiius  Sacas  was 
the  founder,  and  lamblichus  and  Plotinus  the  most  original 
exponents,  aimed  at  affording  complete  satisfaction  to  the 
spiritual  cravings  of  man.  These  indeed  could  no  longer  be 
supjiressed.  And  it  was  evident,  that  unless  Christianity 
wen;  to  occupy  the  field  unopposed,  a  heathen  system  nnist 


THE  CATECHETICAL  SCHOOL.  437 

be  produced,  which  could  find  room  for  the  aspirations  of 
man's  soul  as  well  as  the  workings  of  his  intelligence.  The 
Neo-Platonists  endeavoured  to  provide  this  satisfaction  by 
the  doctrine  of  a  mystic  intuition  of  the  absolute,  obtained 
by  ecstacy,  or  by  the  complete  absorption  of  all  the  faculties  of 
the  spirit,  mind  and  body,  in  divine  contemplation.  At  the 
same  time  they  endeavoured  to  include  in  their  educational 
process  all  the  previous  streams  of  religious  and  philosophic 
thought.  The  scheme  was  a  noble  one;  and  although  its 
mature  development  did  not  take  place  till  a  later  period 
than  that  with  which  we  are  concerned,  yet  there  are  visible 
in  the  works  of  Origen  distinct  traces  of  its  influence, 
especially  in  his  attempt  to  explain  those  remote  and 
mysterious  problems  which  are  really  beyond  the  reach  of 
human  thought.^ 

In  estimating  the  task  which  the  Alexandrian  school  set 
before  it,  we  must  remember  that  it  had  hitherto  been  a 
reproach  to  Christianity  that  it  had  not  succeeded  in  com- 
bating the  difficulties  of  the  higher  minds.  The  reproach 
was  certainly  not  deserved.  Yet  there  was  some  colour  for 
it.  It  had  been  to  the  Gnostic  teachers  rather  than  to  the 
orthodox  that  anxious  Pagan  inquirers  had  hitherto  looked 
for  a  friendly  examination  of  their  doubts.  The  result  was 
by  no  means  encouraging.  They  saw  the  Gnostics,  who 
claimed  the  title  of  Christians,  expelled  from  the  communion 
of  the  Church ;  and  they  saw,  on  the  other  hand,  eminent 
Church  leaders  asserting  the  uselessness  of  philosophy,  and 
requiring  as  a  condition  of  Church  membership  the  repudia- 
tion of  the  entire  intellectual  life. 

The  difficulty  was  a  real  one.  The  problem  was  pressing, 
and  well  worthy  of  solution.  And  a  succession  of  men  arose, 
who,  whatever  their  shortcomings  in  simplicity  of  faith, 
whatever  their  aberrations  from  rigid  orthodoxy,  boldly  faced 
its  requirements;  and  shrank  from  no  mental  labour,  no 
risk  of  misinterpretation,  in  probing  to  the  very  root  the 

1  E.g.,  the  origin  of  evil ;  the  relation  of  the  Incommunicable  Deity  to 
creation  ;  the  source  and  final  destiny  of  all  spiritual  beings  ;  the  doctrine 
of  intermediate  agencies ;  the  final  absorption  of  all  things  in  God. 


438         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

fundamental  conditions  necessary  to  solve  it.  The  names 
of  l*anta3nus,  Clement  and  Origen,  and  especially  the 
two  latter,  stand  out  as  among  the  very  noblest  of  those 
teachers  who  have  striven  above  everything  else  to  under- 
stand, to  state,  and  to  assist  the  ellurts  uf  man  towards 
enlightenment. 


CHAPTEll  ir. 

CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA   (145-2200- 

It  has  already  been  mentioned  that  Pantienus  was  the 
founder  of  the  Catechetical  school.^  But  he  was  something- 
more.  He  was  the  teacher  and  spiritual  father  of  the  great 
Clement,  who  is  the  most  original  spirit  in  the  whole  Ante- 
Mcene  Church. 

His  Life. 

Oddly  enough,  we  know  nothing  of  Clement's  life.  Genial 
and  chatty  as  he  is,  it  never  occurs  to  him  that  posterity 
might  like  to  know  who  he  was.  Like  Plato  and  Thucydides, 
he  discourses  fully  on  the  matter  in  hand,  but  keeps  his  own 
history  to  himself.  Still,  there  are  indications  in  his  writings 
which  offer  some  ground  for  conjecture.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  he  was  a  Greek,  and  very  probably  an  Athenian. 2 
There  is  not  the  smallest  tinge  of  OrientaKsm  about  his 
mind.  Except  the  writer  to  Diognetus,  he  is  the  most 
genuinely  Hellenic  of  all  the  Fathers.  Possessed  of  good 
means,  he  made  the  search  for  truth  his  life's  object,  and 
went  the  round  of  all  the  systems  that  professed  to  satisfy 
it.  We  have  seen  other  instances  of  this  in  Justin  and  Tatian, 
and  more  doubtfully  in  the  Ptoman  Clement,  whose  biography 
has  borrowed  this  feature  from  his  Alexandrian  namesake. 

In  the  first  chapter  of  his  Stromateis,^  Clement  alludes  to 

1  That  is,  in  the  sense  in  which  it  became  celebrated,  as  a  centre 
of  apologetics.  There  is  an  untrustworthy  tradition  which  mentions 
Athenagoras  as  its  first  president. 

-  It  is  true  our  only  authority  is  the  inaccurate  Epiphanius.  But  in 
this  case  internal  probability  points  the  same  way.  His  name,  Titus 
Flavius  Clemens,  points  to  an  ancestral  connection  with  Rome. 

3  Quoted  by  Eusebius,  II.  E.  v.  ii.  Other  important  notices  of  him  in 
Eusebius  are,  H.  E.  iv.  26  ;  v.  28  ;  vi.  13,  i^.—Prcrp.  Ev.  ii.  2  and  5. 

439 


440         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

some  f)f  the  Christian  teachers  who  had  been  of  use  to  him 
in  his  process  from  heathen  darkness  to  light.  The  first 
was  an  Ionian,  who  taught  in  Greece ;  another  a  native 
of  Soutlicrn  Il;ily  ;  a  tliird,  of  Egypt;  a  fifth  had  taught  in 
Assyria,  a  sixth  in  Palestine  (this  man  was  of  Jewish 
orifdn).  and  the  seventli  and  last  was  Panticnus,  whose 
broad  and  philosophic  grasp  of  truth  at  length  brought  the 
weary  soul  to  anchor,  and  raised  in  it  a  profound  sense  of 
gratitude. 

These  scattered  pilgrimages  sufficiently  reveal  the  earnest- 
ness of  Clement's  character.  He  was  no  dilettante,  striving 
to  l»eguile  the  aimless  leisure  of  an  unfilled  life,  but  a  true 
spiritual  athlete,  determined,  even  in  his  heathen  days,  to 
lose  no  chance  of  acquiring  truth  so  long  as  any  corner  of 
the  known  world  remained  to  yield  it.  His  case  is  doubtless 
a  striking  one  ;  but  it  certainly  was  far  from  unique,^  and 
it  brings  vividly  before  us  the  reality  of  the  void  which 
Christianity  was  able  to  fulfil,  and  the  self-sacrificing 
t-nthusiasm  wliicli  tlie  nobler  Pagan  minds  brouglil  into 
their  quest. 

We  have  no  sure  data  for  determining  Clement's  age  when 
he  finally  settled  in  Alexandria  ;  but  the  style  of  his  writings 
makes  it  probable  that  he  had  attained  the  full  maturity  of 
his  powers.  Supposing  him  to  have  been  at  least  forty  when 
he  succeeded  Panta?nus  as  head  of  the  school,  we  may  ap- 
proximately fix  the  date  of  his  birth  at  about  A.D.  140-150. 
For  ab(jut  fourteen  years  he  continued  to  preside  over  it  as 
an  lionoured  presbyter  of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  till  in  202, 
when  the  persecution  arose  under  Severus,  his  disinclination 
for  martyrdom  caused  him  to  (piit  the  scene  of  his  labours, 
never  more  to  return.  He  spent  the  rest  of  his  life  in 
Palestine,  chiefly  in  the  society  of  his  old  pu])il  Alexander 

*  The  "<iiiest  for  a  religion"  was  a  very  real  thing  in  those  days. 
Earnest  men  hunted  up  the  dilTerent  aspects  of  truth  in  thtir  native 
habitats.  The  frequent  alhisions  to  wide  and  prolonged  travel  seem  to 
suggest  a  generally  diffused  jmssession  of  good  means.  We  must  not 
forget,  however,  that  the  standard  of  living  among  students  and  philo- 
sophers was  very  moderate,  and  food  and  lodging  clu-ap. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  441 

of  Jerusalem.i  The  date  of  his  death  is  uncertain.  His 
work,  however,  was  already  done.  He  had  inspired  many 
noble  minds  with  his  broad  and  genial  philosophy,  and 
among  them  Oriii;en,  the  greatest  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers, 
and  his  own  worthy  successor  in  the  professorial  chair. 

His  Literary  Qualities. 

We  proceed  to  consider  Clement's  position  as  a  Christian 
writer  and  philosophic  theologian.  It  is  difficult  to  overvalue 
him  in  either  relation.  As  a  writer  he  is  conspicuous  for 
infusing  into  theological  discussions  a  rich  vein  of  combined 
classic  learning  and  racy  common-sense,  such  as  the  English 
churchman  may  find  in  Fuller,  Taylor,  or  South,  but  which 
it  is  in  vain  to  seek  elsewhere  among  Ante-Nicene  Fathers. 
His  reading  is  immense ;  but  he  moves  with  ease  under  its 
weight.  It  obscures  his  argument  at  times,  but  never  his 
judgment.  Though  each  step  that  he  takes  is  accompanied 
by  a  train  of  authorities,  poetical,  rhetorical,  and  philoso- 
phical, he  uses  these  not  as  props,  far  less  as  guides,  but 
solely  as  consenting  witnesses,  who  endorse  the  truth  he 
affirms.  At  the  same  time  he  would  not  move  at  ease  without 
them  ;  their  voices  are  linked  with  his  own  by  many  a  train 
of  pleasant  association ;  he  encourages  them  to  venture  on 
fresh  paths  under  his  guidance.  He  resembles  that  wise 
householder  who  brings  out  of  his  treasure-house  things  new 
and  old. 

Among  the  poets  Homer  is  his  favourite,  among  the 
philosophers  Plato.  To  these  he  refers  in  countless  in- 
stances; but  the  range  of  his  familiarity  extends  through 
the  whole  domain  of  Greek  letters.  Hesiod,  the  tragic  and 
comic  dramatists,  the  Attic  masters  of  thought,  the  Stoic  and 
Pythagorean  prose-writers  and  poets,  not  excluding  the  so- 
called  Sibylline  literature— he  levies  contributions  from  them 
all.  The  scholar,  whose  interests  are  wholly  apart  from 
theology,  may  yet  find  in  Clement  a  fruitful  mine  of  study. 

1  About  A.D.  213  we  find  him  recommended  by  Alexander  to  the  Church 
of  Antioch.     This  is  the  last  notice  of  his  life. 


442  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Embeddod  in  his  lengthy  i)eriods  lie  quotations,  allusions, 
and  reminiscences  innumerable,  some  of  which  are  accurate 
and  easily  identical  )le ;  others  invite  the  critic's  emendating 
hand ;  others  are  unknown  to  us  from  any  other  source.  It 
is  prol)able  that  some  still  lie  undetected  amid  the  surround- 
ing mass  of  curious  and  metaphorical  expressions  with  which 
he  delights  to  garnisli  his  style. 

The  idiom  used  by  Clement  approximates  nearer  to  the 
Attic  than  that  of  Origen,  Irenasus,  or  Eusebius,  But  this 
resemblance  is,  after  all,  only  comparative.  The  scholar  who 
has  been  accustomed  to  the  clear  stream  of  Attic  diction  of  the 
best  age,  when  he  takes  up  Clement,  finds  himself  obliged  to 
read  into  old  familiar  words  the  accumulated  storage  of  many 
minds,  the  deposits  of  successive  strata  of  thought.  Hence 
their  connotation  is  rendered  highly  complex,  and  terms  once 
living  and  expressive  have  Ijecome  allusive  and  conventional ; 
and  this  constitutes  no  small  source  of  difficulty  in  api)re- 
hending  Clement's  drift.  In  order  thoroughly  to  master 
the  vocabulary  of  the  Alexandrine  Fathers,  it  is  necessary 
to  familiarise  oneself  not  only  with  the  works  of  Philo,  but 
still  more  with  those  of  the  Pagan  rhetoricians  and  philoso- 
phers of  the  period.  It  is  in  the  sense  of  words  far  more 
than  in  modifications  of  syntax  that  the  true  difference 
between  the  classical  and  the  theological  writers  consists.^ 

In  spite,  therefore,  of  the  vigour  of  Clement's  thought,  and 
the  spirited  language  in  which  he  presents  it,  we  find  a  sort 
of  second-liand  allusiveness  in  his  literary  style,  which  is  not 
favoura1)le  to  clearness  of  meaning.  Our  opinion  differs  from 
that  of  many  critics,  who  rank  him  as  the  best  among  the 
Fathers  in  point  of  style.  To  us  he  appears  inferior  to 
Origen,  in  whose  diction  a  far  more  complete  fusion  of 
thought  and  language  is  attained,  though  at  the  cost  of  a 
further  removal  from  the  conventional  fine  writing  of  the 

'  A  lliorou^'lily  ^'ood  historical  lexicon  of  the  later  Greek  is  still  a 
desideratum.  Every  Greek  scholar  is  aware  of  the  change  in  the  mean- 
ing of  words  from  Homer  to  Aristotle.  Yet  the  almost  equally  prufitund 
modifications  of  meaning  from  the  time  of  Aristotle  to  that  of  Clement 
are  often  unnoticed  or  forgotten. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  443 

day.  Serious  and  profound  writer  as  he  is,  Clement  is  at 
bottom  a  rhetorician ;  one,  it  is  true,  to  whom  the  mere  form 
was  wholly  secondary  to  the  truth  conveyed,  but  in  whom 
the  fresh  sense  of  nature  was  dulled  by  a  long  course  of 
artificial  training,  which  it  was  impossible  to  shake  off. 

His  Writing's. 

His  extant  writings  are  sufficiently  voluminous.  They 
consist,  in  the  first  place,  of  three  lengthy  and  closely-con- 
nected treatises,  intended  to  sketch  out  the  plan  of  Christian 
education,  and,  from  their  desultory  mode  of  treatment, 
doubtless  a  faithful  reproduction  of  his  lectures  in  the  school. 
These  are  the  Protrepticus}  or  "  Exhortation  to  Greeks,"  the 
Pcedagorjus^  or  "Tutor,"  and  the  Stromateis^  or  Stromata, 
which  literally  means  "  parti-coloured  carpets,"  l)ut  may  be 
rendered  "  Miscellanies."  These  will  be  dealt  with  presently. 
We  possess  also  three  short  and  defective  treatises,  which 
probably  belong  to  the  lost  Hijpotyposes,^  or  "  Outlines,"  the 
fourth  and  final  division  of  his  scheme  of  Christian  truth. 
They  are — (i.)  "  Summaries  of  Doctrines  from  Theodotus 
and  the  Eastern  School  of  Yalentinian  Gnostics."  ^  (2.) 
"Prophetic  Selections."^  (3.)  "Adumbrations  on  some  of 
the  Canonical  Epistles."^  On  these  also  a  few  words  will 
be  said.  The  only  other  treatise  that  has  sur^ived  is  that 
entitled,  "  AVho  is  the  Eich  Man  that  is  to  be  Saved  ? "  ^ 
which  Eusebius  expressly  attributes  to  Clement,  and  which 
is  undoubtedly  his,  though  it  is  inserted  in  some  good  MSS. 

^  irpoTpeiTTLKhs  \6yos  -rrpbs  "EXKrjvas. 

-  IIat5a7W76j,  in  three  books. 

^  'LrpwixoLTeis,  in  eight  books,  whence  Clement  is  often  called  6  ^Tpwuarevs. 
Its  full  title  is  Tujv  Kara  rrjv  a\t]dri  (piXoaocplav  yvuaTiKuiv  viroixvr}p.a.TU}v 
'LTpuixareh  H'. 

^  'TTroTUTTuJcrfts. 

^  e/c  tGjv  OeodoTOV  /cat  tTjs  'AvutoXlktjs  diSaaKaXias  Kara  tovs  OvaXeuTivov 
Xpovovs  iiTLTOfxai. 

'■  e/c  Tiljv  Trpo(pT]TU}v  tKXoyai. 

"  Adumbratioucs  in  aliquot  Epistolas  C'inonicas,  preserved  in  the  old 
Latin  version. 

*^  Tts  6  acoi'Sfiepos  itXovjlos  ;  Quis  dives  Salvetiir  ? 


444         ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

among  the  works  of  Origen,  and  for  a  time  was  attribnted 
to  him. 

])esi(k'S  tliis  goodly  catalogue,  a  number  of  important 
works  have  perished.  First  come  the  Hypotyposes  in  eight 
books  already  referred  to,  a  grievous  loss,  which  may  yet  be 
partially  redeemed  if  the  omens  of  discovery  so  happily  in- 
augurated of  late  years  be  fulfilled. 

Then  again  we  read  of  treatises  "  On  Providence,"  "  On 
the  Paschal  Controversy,"  "On  Fasting,"  "On  Slander;" 
an  "Exhortation  to  Patience,"  addressed  to  the  newly-bap- 
tized; an  "Ecclesiastical  Canon;"  "Various  Definitions;" 
besides  several  works  referred  to  by  Clement  liimself  as 
contemplated  or  undertaken,  but  of  which  we  have  no  fur- 
ther record  :  c.fj.^  "  On  First  Principles,"  "  On  Prophecy,"  "  On 
Allegorical  Interpretation,"  "  On  Angels,"  "  On  the  Devil," 
"  On  the  Creation  of  the  World,"  "  On  the  Unity  of  the 
Church,"  "  On  tlie  Duties  of  Bishops,  Presbyters,  Deacons 
and  Widows,"  "  On  the  Soul,"  "  On  the  Resurrection,"  "  On 
Marriage,"  "On  Continence,"  and  possibly  "Against  Here- 
sies."^ Mention  is  also  made  by  l*alladius  of  a  short 
commentary  on  the  prophet  Amos. 

^  The  following  ruuiarks  may  be  made  on  these  lost  treatises: — (i)  Ttpl 
TTpopolas.  Of  this  some  fragments  are  preserved  in  the  works  of  Maximus, 
(2)  irepl  Tov  wdax^  oirfypafifxa.  In  this  he  wrote  down  the  traditions  he  had 
collected  from  the  times  of  the  Apostles  to  his  own  day.  (3)  5toX^^6ij  vepl 
VT]<TT(la%.  (4)  irepl  KaToKoKias.  (5)  irporpewTiKbs  els  vvofioviju  irpbs  roi's  vcwarl 
<pu)TiaOii>Tas.  0])serve  this  familiar  use  of  the  term  "enlightened  "  = 
baptized.  (6)  KavCov  (KK\r](TiaaTiK6s,  fj  irpbs  roi/s  'loi/Sa/foiras.  S.  Jerome 
describes  it  more  fully  as  "  de  canonibus  ecclesiasticis  et  adversus  eos  qui 
Judaiorum  sequuntur  errorem,  liber  unus,  quern  proprie  Alcxandro  Hiero- 
solymorum  cpiscopo  irpoai<pdjvq(X€.''  A  fragment  of  this  is  preserved  in 
Nicepliorus.  (7)  6poL  otd^opot.  The  only  definition  now  remaining  is  that 
of  spirit,  which  is  worth  giving,  "  irvfvuA  (an  \e7rr77  Kal  &v\oi  koI  d(rxT;/xdTt(rT05 
iKiropevTiKT)  D7ra/)^ts."  (lo)  trtpl  dpx^f.  Clement  declares  no  less  than  three 
times  his  intention  of  writing  on  this  subject.  We  do  not  believe  he  ever 
carried  it  out.  (11)  irtpl  Tpo^Tjreiay.  He  promises  to  give  in  this  treatise 
a  full  account  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Sjiirit.  (12)  De  mcmbris  ct 
afTcctibus,  quando  de  Deo  dicuntur,  allegorice  interpretandis,  promised  in 
the  Stromata  (i^)  wtpl  i^y^Xup.  (14)  irfplroO  5ialS6\ov.  {1$)  xtpl  ytyiatm 
KbapLov,  alluded  to  ])y  Eusebius  (H.  E.  vi.  13)  as  an  unfulfilled  j>romise. 
{16)  De  Ecflcsiae  unitate  et  cxcellentia,    (17)  Do  ofliciis  Episcoporum,  prcs- 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  445 

His  Theological  Principles. 

The  works  that  remain  supply  ample  material  for  judging 
of  Clement's  theological  position  and  the  leading  features  of 
his  thought.  Strictly  speaking,  he  has  no  system.  His 
habit  of  mind  is  discursive  and  his  views  eclectic.  He  has 
neither  the  intellectual  ambition  of  the  systematist  nor  the 
passion  for  consistency  of  the  logician.  But  the  conceptions 
which  dominate  his  thought  are  emphasised  throughout  his 
writings  with  a  clearness  peculiarly  valuable  for  his  purpose, 
which  was  above  all  things  that  of  a  missionary  and  an 
apologist.  Surrounded  by  men  of  learning  and  reflection,  he 
set  himself  to  interpret  the  Christian  revelation  in  terms  of 
the  philosophic  reason,  and  to  approve  it  by  reference  to  a 
standard  which  his  hearers  and  himself  could  alike  accept. 
He  is  not  exactly  a  rationalist :  still  less  is  he  a  mystic. 
And  yet  he  includes  a  great  deal  of  both.  He  is  a  rationalist, 
in  fearlessly  basing  the  evidence  of  truth  upon  the  faculty  of 
reason,  and  a  mystic  in  referring  that  reason  to  its  Divine 
and  illimitable  source.  In  the  dry  light  of  intellect,  he  sur- 
passes his  Christian  successors :  in  his  genial  humanity  and 
optimistic  view  of  the  universe  he  is  equally  superior  to  his 
Stoic  predecessors. 

The  key  to  Clement's  theology  is  to  be  found  in  his 
humanistic  training.  Among  all  his  teachers,  only  one  was 
of  Judffio-Christian  extraction,  and  it  is  clear  that  his  influ- 
ence was  of  little  account.  Clement  approaches  Christianity 
clear  of  Jewish  prepossessions.  For  him  the  preparation  for 
Christ's  advent  had  been  world-wide,  not  national.  His  first 
and  most  important  principle  is  the  unity  of  all  truth, 
whether  manifested  in  heathen  thinkers,  in  Jewish  pro- 
phets, or  still  more  perfectly  in  the  Incarnate  Word.     And 

byterorum,  diaconorum  et  viduarum.  (18)  irept  \f'vxqs.  {ig)  TrepldfaaTaaecos. 
(20)  6  ya/j-LKbs  X670S.  This  he  speaks  of  as  accomplished.  Perhaps  he 
refers  to  the  sections  in  the  Tutor  and  Miscellanies  whicli  treat  of  conjugal 
relations.  (21)  irepl  iyKpareias.  The  same  remark  applies  to  the  last. 
(22)  TT/jos  rds  alpeaeis.  This  can  hardly  refer  to  a  separate  work,  but  rather 
to  the  scope  of  all  his  greater  treatises. 


446         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

the  ground  of  this  unity  is  the  immanence  of  the  Divine 
Keason  (X6709)  in  the  universal  human  intolh'gence.     The 
dillic'ulty  of  maintaining  this  })rinciple  in  face  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  sin,  of  alienation  from  God,  calls  out  his  highest 
powers  of  argument.     AVe  do  not  say  that  he  has  solved  it. 
The  charge  broiiglit  against  (Jreek  tlieology  in  general  is  that 
its  sense  of  sin  is  defective.     Nor  is  this  wholly  unjust. 
Clement  at  any  rate  is  more  occupied  with  developing  the 
beneficent  work  of  the  Word  as  raising  man  to  his  original 
kinship  with  Deity,  than  willi  analysing  the  nature  of  that 
estrangement  which  demanded  so  tremendous  a  sacritice  on 
the  part  of  the  Son  of  CJod.     But  if,  in  pursuing  the  great 
truth  that  God  is  light  and  God  is  love,  he  brings  it  into  tlie 
closest  relation  with  the  illumination  of  man's  intelligence 
and  the  purification  of  his  soul,  we  must  allow  something 
for  the  animating  influence  of  that  truth  itself,  as  well  as  for 
the  special  imperfections  of  Clement's  spiritual  endowment. 
He  was  in   fact  of  a  strictly  contemplative   temperament. 
The  cry  of  anguish  which  Tertullian  utters,  which  Origen 
all  but  suppresses,  which  Augustine  suffers  to  well  forth  in 
burning  words,  is  not  the  natural  language  of  his  souL    AVith 
him  the  love  of  God,  once  made  known,  is  meant  to  be  fear- 
lessly appropriated,  with  only  the  explanations  tlirown  upon 
it  by  the  lifjht  of  God,  which  reveal  its  essential  character 
and  reconcile  its  seeming  contradictions.     To  tliis  cause  we 
may  trace  his  unsympathetic  attitude  towards  martyrdom, 
viewed  as  a  baptism  of  blood  washing  away  post-baptismal 
sin ;  his  indifference  towards  the  great  hierarchical  movement 
in  which  his  bisliop,  Demetrius,  discerned  a  remedy  against 
the  moral  dangers  that  l)eset  the  Church  ;  and  liis  insuflicient 
recognition  of  the  power  of  faith  apart  from  knowledge,  and 
of  the  atoning  efficacy  of  the  Blood  of  Christ. 

Th(^  value  of  a  writer's  contributions  to  theology  is  to  be 
judged  either  from  their  comi)letenes8  as  an  exposition  of 
wliat  is  held  l)y  tlie  universal  Church,  or  from  the  clearness 
and  force  witli  wliich  tliey  emphasise  some  one  or  more 
fundamental  truths  in  their  free  working.  'I'hc  theology  of 
Clement  is  of  value  exclusively  from  tlie  lattci-  jxiint  of  view. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  447 

He  has  brou^jht  out,  as  no  other  Father,  the  doctrine  of 
indwelling  Deity,  and  its  necessary  correlative,  the  divine 
origin  and  destiny  of  man,  in  whom  Deity  dwells.  It  is  true 
that  he  speaks  of  God  as  He  is  in  Himself,  in  Platonic 
lancrua^e,  as  the  One,  the  Transcendent,  the  Unknowable. 
But  this  view,  the  product  of  his  heathen  days,  is  not  allowed 
to  obscure  his  grasp  of  God's  immanence  as  the  Logos  in  His 
entire  rational  creation,  which  He  is  ever  disciplining,  ever 
enlightening,  ever  fitting  for  union  with  Himself.^  Eedemp- 
tion  witli  him  is  not  so  much  an  accomplished  fact  as  a 
living  process.  We  are  reminded  of  a  passage  in  the  biography 
of  the  late  Emperor  Frederick.  When  visiting  Jerusalem,  and 
gazing  on  the  probable  scene  of  Christ's  Passion,  he  wrote  in 
his  diary  :  "  The  sight  made  me  contemplate  anew  the  eternal 
fact  of  redemption,  of  which  Calvary  is  the  highest  ex- 
pression." This  is  exactly  Clement's  point  of  view,  clothed 
in  modern  language. 

How  then  does  redemption  effect  its  purpose  ?  Through 
the  operation  of  the  Divine  Instructor,  first  as  love,  then  as 
light  and  love  in  one.  In  the  Tutor,  Clement  shows  how  the 
Word  leads  men  through  trial  and  discipline  towards  moral 
perfection ;  how  He  taught  the  Greeks  through  poetry  and 
philosophy,  and  in  a  lower  degree  through  custom  and  law, 
the  Jews  through  rites  and  ceremonies  and  the  spiritual 
witness  of  prophecy;  all  the  time  pointing  onward  with 
unwearying  emphasis  to  the  fuller  disclosure  of  His  divine 
purpose  that  should  come  when  the  time  was  ripe.  The 
Incarnation  of  the  Word  in  Jesus  Christ  throws  back  upon 
this  long  process  the  clear  light  of  intelligibility.  What  was 
half  obliterated  becomes  decipherable;  what  was  isolated 
falls  into  its  proper  connection.     It  is  seen  that  all  history 

^  Clemeut  is  usually  regarded  as  a  Christian  Platonist.  Yet  he  seems 
to  us  to  be  more  influenced  in  this  his  central  conception  by  the  Stoic 
philosophy  than  by  Plato.  Plato,  as  Jowett  truly  remarks  (introduction 
to  the  Timaius,  p.  510),  is  more  embarrassed  by  the  sense  of  the  existence 
of  evil  in  his  theory  of  creation  than  the  Hebrew  author  of  Genesis.  Hence 
Clement  instinctively  allies  himself  with  the  Stoic  doctrine  of  immanence 
rather  than  with  the  Platonic  idea  of  creation  partly  by  God,  partly  by 
inferior  agencies. 


448         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

has  been  a  ])r('i)aratioii  for  Christ;  or,  in  other  words,  a  pro- 
gressive manifestation  of  Christ  in  the  life  of  man,  gathered 
into  a  focus  in  the  divine-human  life  of  Jesus,  and  now 
spread  hy  His  Church  into  tlie  universal  consciousness  of 
mankind. 

The  Christian  Gnostic. 

It  results  from  this  view  of  redemption  tliat  the  goal  of 
Christian  perfection  is  knowledge  [yvcoai';),  and  this  Clement 
unhesitatingly  asserts.  In  contradistinction  to  the  false 
gnosis  he  propounds  the  principles  of  the  true  gnosis,  wliich 
is  perfect,  loving  communion,  based  on  spiritual  enlighten- 
ment. He  does  not  shrink  from  the  name  Gnostic.  He 
adopts  it  as  the  Christian's  liighest  title  of  honour.  The 
Christian  as  such  is  called  to  be  a  Gnostic.  The  baptism  of 
regeneration  not  only  seals  our  forgiveness,  but  brings  us 
within  the  circle  of  the  light,  opening  thereby  the  possibility 
of  infinite  develoj^ment  to  the  soul. 

What  then  is  the  essential  difference  which  marks  ofl" 
Clement's  ( Jnostic  from  the  Gnostic  of  the  heretics  ?  In  one 
word,  it  is  his  freedom.  The  old  Gnostics,  it  will  l)e  remem- 
bered, tied  by  their  conception  of  God  as  transcendent  perfec- 
tion, refused  to  allow  Him  any  contact  with  the  world.  The 
world  was  so  imperfect  that  they  regarded  it  as  the  work  of 
a  Power  many  stages  removed  from  God.  Nevertheless  some 
original  germs  of  deity  are  found  in  it,  and  it  is  these  and 
these  alone  which,  by  their  origin,  are  ca2)al)le  of  redemption. 
Inferior  natures  are  for  ever  confined  within  the  sphere  of 
their  original  potentialities,  and  thus  admit  only  a  limited 
redemption.  This  dark  shadow  of  necessity  hanging  over 
God  was  abhorrent  to  Clement.  Undeterred  by  the  contra- 
dictions of  ap})arent  exi)erienee,  he  distinctly  asserts  the 
universality  of  redem])tion,  and  makes  it  realisable  through 
the  freedom  of  man's  will.  Christ  has  lifted  all  into  the 
heavenly  sphere,  and  all  may  continue  within  ii.  if  they 
will. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  449 

Freedom  of  the  Will. 

Clement  is  the  first  of  Christian  writers  to  assert  clearly 
the  doctrine  of  freewill.^  He  passes  beyond  S.  Paul's  con- 
ception of  sin  as  bondage  to  evil,  and  righteousness  as  bondage 
to  Christ,  and  each  as  freedom  with  respect  to  the  other,  and 
arrives  at  the  higher  point  where  freedom  means  original 
capacity  of  moral  choice.  To  this  he  was  driven  by  his 
Gnostic  antagonists,  who  declared  that  if  God  had  created 
Adam  perfect,  perfect  he  must  to  all  eternity  have  remained. 
In  this  instance,  as  in  so  many  others,  the  hostility  of  these 
brilliant  thinkers  was  a  spur  to  the  intellect  of  the  Church. 

Though  Clement  scarcely  carried  his  explanation  beyond 
the  human  sphere,  and  did  not,  like  Origen,  attack  the  prob- 
lem of  cosmical  evil,  yet  this  contribution  of  his  to  theology 
is  of  the  utmost  value,  and  itself  would  entitle  him  to  a 
master's  place. 

The  solidarity  of  mankind  in  Adam,  which  may  be  called 
the  main  principle  of  S.  Augustine's  system,  is  replaced  in 
Clement's  by  the  solidarity  of  mankind  in  Christ.  Christ 
is  for  him  not  only  the  type  of  manhood,  but  the  one  perfect 
man.  The  deeper  question  of  Christ's  own  freedom  does  not 
engage  his  attention.  How  freedom  of  choice  between  oppo- 
sites  passes  into  conscious  identification  with  the  absolute 
good  as  such  he  does  not  determine ;  but  his  serene  and 
hopeful  view  of  human  nature,  as  expressed  once  for  all  in 
the  freewill  of  Christ,  must  ever  rank  high  among  the  inspir- 
ing forces  in  the  Christian's  spiritual  progress. 

Thus  far  Clement  is  successful  in  shaking  off  the  pernicious 
dualism  of  the  Gnostics,  which  set  a  hard  and  fast  line 
between  the  carnal  and  spiritual  Christian.  But  he  admits 
another  distinction  between  believers,  which,  smooth  it  down 
as  he  will,  he  cannot  render  free  from  danger. 

In  his  day  the  Church  was  beginning  to  lose  its  original 
character  of  a  society  in  which  all  were  bent  on  holiness. 

1  The  phrase  lihcrum  arhitrium,  which  states  the  doctrine  with  precision, 
is  due  to  TertuUian.  The  Greek  writers  have  no  equivalent  expression, 
t6  avre^ovaiov  being  the  nearest. 

2   F 


450         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Its  gates  were  opening  wide,  and  multitudes  were  pouring  in 
for  whom  the  ideal  of  the  true  Gnostic  was  too  high.  For 
these  it  was  necessary  to  present  the  Christian  life  in  the 
form  of  a  new  law.  Tlie  Western  Church  liad  already  girded 
itself  witli  cnUiusiasm  to  the  task.  Clement  applied  to  the 
problem  his  theory  of  the  higher  and  lower  lives.  For  those 
who  shrank  from  the  discipline  necessary  to  the  attainment  of 
that  spiritual  insight  which  alone  discerns  the  Divine  Love, 
it  was  sullicient  to  offer  as  motives  faith  and  hope,  springing 
out  of  fear.  The  goal  of  this  life  is  Holiness,  the  negative 
virtue  of  abstinence  from  wilful  sin.  liut  beyond  it  lies  the 
sphere  of  Knowledge,  whicli  implies  Love  and  active  Itiglit- 
eousness.  He  does  not  say  that  this  higher  life  is  impossible 
for  all,  but  lie  is  contented  to  acquiesce  in  its  non-attainment 
by  the  majority  as  a  matter  of  fact,  lailh  is  for  him  imper- 
fect apprehension,  not  the  absolute  identification  of  the  soul 
with  Christ,  which  is  S.  Paul's  conception  of  it.  Thus  he 
banishes  faith  from  the  perfect  life,  as  well  as  fear  and  hope, 
the  former  of  which  is  unworthy,  the  latter  unnecessary. 
Love  remains  ;  indeed,  it  is  the  element  and  the  instrument 
of  true  knowledge.  Lut  Love,  as  he  conceives  it,  is  not  an 
emotion.  Li  his  view  Christ  was  absolutely  passionless,  and 
as  Christ  was,  so  the  advanced  Christian  must  be.  His  love 
is  the  apprehension  of  the  absolute  good,  in  harmonious  move- 
ment with  it.  As  we  should  express  it,  love  is  disinterested, 
purified  from  all  thought  of  self.  If  it  were  possible  to  offer 
it  the  choice  between  the  joys  of  heaven  and  the  knowledge 
of  God,  it  would  unhesitatingly  choose  the  latter.^ 

The  danger  of  such  a  theory  is  patent.  It  tends  to  set 
before  men  two  diflerent  ideals,  the  one  for  the  many,  the 
other  for  the  few ;  the  one  based  on  self-interest,  the  other 
on  love  of  truth.  lUit  we  must  not  suppose  that  Clement 
admitted  any  such  radical  divergence.  The  two  ideals  are 
stages  in  tlie  path  of  perfection.  The  first  must  be  pissed 
through  before  tlie  second  can  be  reached.     It  is  related  to 

'  The  writer  is  much  indebted  throufjjliout  thi.s  .section  to  nijrg'.s  "Christian 
Platonists  of  Alexandria,"  Lecture  HL,  and  to  Allen's  "Continuity  of 
Chri-stian  Thought,"  ch.  i. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  451 

it  as  the  incomplete  to  the  complete,  not  as  the  essentially 
inferior  to  the  essentially  excellent.  Clement  forms  a  church 
within  the  Church,  contrastinsj  the  two  much  as  Ori(i;en  after- 
wards  contrasted  the  visible  with  the  invisible  Church. 


His  Attitude  to  the  Scriptures. 

We  have  considered  Clement's  teaching  thus  far  without 
reference  to  his  attitude  towards  the  Scriptures.  It  would 
be  an  injustice  to  his  Christian  convictions  to  imply  that  he 
at  all  undervalued  them.  Though  he  rates  human  culture  so 
high  as  to  consider  it  a  stage  in  the  Divine  education  of  the 
soul,  he  does  not  for  a  moment  allow  that  man  can  originate 
a  revelation.  All  truth  comes  from  God ;  and  there  can  be 
no  schism  in  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Eeason.  Never- 
theless, he  recognises  Scripture  as  pre-eminently  God's  Word, 
for  in  it  is  heard  everywhere  the  voice  of  the  Divine  In- 
structor, teaching  and  pleading  and  correcting,  and  fashioning 
man's  life  into  conformity  with  His  own.  At  the  same  time, 
he  finds  the  evidence  of  the  inspiration  of  Scripture  within 
the  human  reason,  not  in  any  external  authority.  The 
relation  of  inspiration  to  human  genius,  and  of  Biblical  to 
non- Biblical  inspiration,  are  questions  of  comparatively 
recent  date,  and  in  their  modern  form  are  not  approached 
by  Clement.  But  the  entire  tone  of  his  works  indicates 
unmistakably  in  what  way  he  would  have  answered  them. 
Inspiration  for  him  is  not  an  arbitrary  or  coercive  action 
of  the  Divine  Spirit  upon  the  human,  as  it  was  for  the 
Montanists,  who  likened  the  Spirit  to  the  player,  and  the 
human  speaker  to  the  instrument  upon  which  He  played. 
It  is  rather  the  highest  exercise  of  that  capacity  for  discern- 
ing truth  with  which  the  soul  is  endowed  in  virtue  of  its 
Divine  sonship,  and  which  it  exhibits  in  proportion  as  it 
has  conformed  itself  to  the  Divine  Image.  Kevelation,  like 
redemption,  is  regarded  by  Clement  not  as  a  deposit  given 
once  for  all,  but  as  a  continuous  though  varying  process, 
appropriated  by  the  soul  whose  eyes  are  opened  to  see  it, 
in  greater  or  less  measure  according  to  its  spiritual  progress, 


I 


452  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

uiid  also  accordiug  to  the  activity  of  the  revealing  Word. 
Thus  revelation  and  inspiration  were  at  their  height  among 
the  Apostles,  because  the  Apostles  both  lived  in  close  com- 
munion with  the  Incarnate  Word,  and  because  the  Word 
was  then  iu  the  fulness  of  time  more  perfectly  revealing 
Himself. 

Witli  such  a  general  attitude  towards  the  subject,  we 
need  not  expect  any  great  keenness  of  critical  insight.  He 
accepts  without  misgiving  not  only  the  entire  LXX.  but 
many  apocryphal  works  both  of  Jewish  and  Christian  origin  ; 
or  if  his  judgment  doubts  their  authenticity,  he  just  raises 
a  passing  (juestion  without  denying  himself  the  support  of 
their  testimony.  His  strongest  expression  on  the  compara- 
tive value  of  Scripture  writers  is  where  he  insists  on  the 
equal  authority  of  S.  Paul's  Epistles  with  the  writings  of  the 
Twelve.  So  far  as  he  enters  into  tlie  controversy  at  all,  he 
is  a  Paulinist,  but  in  no  one-sided  sense.  Nevertheless,  he 
misapprehends  S.  Paul's  teaching  in  its  capital  point,  in 
common,  it  must  be  allowed,  witli  nearly  all  the  Ante-Nicene 
Fathers. 

In  interpreting  Scripture,  he  lays  down  no  new  principles. 
He  condemns  the  literalism  of  tlie  Pubbins.  In  conformity 
with  the  practice  of  his  day,  he  allows  allegorical  explanation, 
especially  in  everything  that  ai)proximates  to  an  anthropo- 
morphic representation  of  God.  He  speaks  of  every  text 
having  a  threefold  application  as  a  sign  of  truth,  a  command- 
ment, and  a  pnjphecy  ;  but  lie  does  not  weave  this  view  into 
the  fabric  of  his  theology,  and  it  exercises  but  little  inlluence 
over  liini.  TIk;  true  sense  of  Scripture  is  given  firstly  by 
the  consentient  voice  of  the  Church,  and  secondly,  by  the 
illuminating  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  former  he  traces 
to  apostolic  tradition  ;  tlu'  latter  is  the  believer's  inalienable 
privilege.  It  was  objected  to  him  by  tlie  "merely  correct 
believers"  {opdohu^aarai)  that  to  do  without  an  authoritative 
canon  of  interpretation  is  to  leave  the  truth  uncertain.  To 
this  he  replied  that  no  one  denies  there  is  an  art  of  medicine 
])ecause  difTtu'ent  schools  of  medical  science  exist  and  diflerent 
modes  of  treatment  are  followed.     All  great  truths  excitt^ 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  453 

controversy ;  in  all  things  there  is  a  genuine  and  a  counter- 
feit. The  great  duty  as  well  as  the  great  difficulty  is  to 
decide  aright.  Thus  he  declares  that  the  true  refutation 
of  heresy  lies  in  appealing  to  the  true  sense  of  Scripture,  not 
to  isolated  texts,  but  to  the  general  drift.  The  remedy  for 
error  is  not  less  knowledge  but  more.  The  path  of  scientific 
culture  is  a  necessary  preliminary  to  understanding  the 
Divine  Oracles. 


His  View  of  the  Church. 

His  doctrine  of  the  Church  is  nowhere  clearly  formulated. 
He  is  too  entirely  preoccupied  with  spiritual  theology  to  do 
justice  to  the  importance  of  ecclesiastical  organisation.  In 
this  respect  he  compares  unfavourably  with  Irenaeus  and 
Tertullian,  and  still  more  with  Cyprian.  His  conception  of 
the  Church  is  predominantly  ethical.  It  consists  of  all  those 
who  have  accepted  the  discipline  of  the  Divine  Instructor, 
who  realise  their  calling  as  the  children  of  God.  He  pro- 
bably accepted  the  orthodox  views  on  apostolical  succession, 
baptism  and  the  Eucharist ;  but  they  are  rather  incidentally 
referred  to  than  made  the  subjects  of  precise  definition. 
Worship  is  in  his  eyes  the  practice  of  righteousness ;  sacrifice 
is  the  oblation  of  self  to  do  God's  will ;  the  altar  is  the  con- 
gregation of  those  who  give  themselves  to  prayer,  having  one 
voice  and  one  mind.  He  has  no  leaning  towards  asceticism, 
though  in  one  place  he  speaks  admiringly  of  those  who 
practise  it.  But  his  conception  of  the  Fatherhood  of  God 
leads  him  to  pronounce  all  human  relationships  sacred.  He 
applies  to  the  circle  of  family  life  the  words  of  Christ, 
"  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  togetlier  in  My  Name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them."  He  disapproves  of  com- 
munity of  goods,  and  declares  that  true  poverty  consists  not 
in  renouncing  riches,  but  in  detaching  the  heart  from  them. 
The  world  is  not  indeed  the  best  of  p()ssil)le  worlds,  but  it  is 
in  no  unreal  sense  the  home  of  him  who  knows  that  Christ 
dwells  in  it  by  His  Spirit. 

The  idea  that   Chiist  will  shortlv  come  in  the  flesh  to 


454         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

reward  tlie  faitliful,  and  take  vengeance  upon  His  enemies, 
has  no  attractions  for  him,  believing  as  he  does  that  Christ 
is  already  truly  present,  and  has  begun  to  witness  His  triumph 
at  the  Father's  right  hand.  The  judgment  of  the  world  is 
not  regarded  as  an  imminent  and  sudden  catastrophe,  but  as 
a  spiritual  ])r()cess  actually  going  on.  The  punishment  of 
the  wicked  he  considers  to  be  wholly  disciplinary  and 
remedial,  God's  justice  being  but  the  obverse  of  His  love. 
The  unbeliever  who  refuses  exhortation  must  Ije  terrified  by 
threats,  and,  if  these  prove  inefficacious,  must  be  curbed  by 
severity.  Judgment  is  not  an  end,  but  a  means.  God  judges 
that  he  may  amend.  His  punishments  are  a  necessary  element 
(jf  His  educational  process.  Whether  Clement  carried  this 
theory  so  far  as  to  believe,  like  Origen,  in  a  universal  restora- 
tion, we  have  not  the  means  of  knowing,  but  such  a  belief 
would  be  in  conformity  with  his  principle  that  the  Divine 
Love  is  the  central  jxjwer  of  the  universe,  and  must  ulti- 
mately prevail 


Defects  of  his  Theolog-y. 

We  conclude  this  l)rief  sketch  of  Clement's  theology  with 
one  or  two  remarks  upon  its  defects.  The  first  is  tlie  diffi- 
culty of  connecting  the  ideal  with  the  actual  relationship  of 
man  to  God.  Clement  bases  all  his  arguments  upon  the  vital 
character  of  tliis  relationsliip.  "Like  is  known  by  like," 
"  spirit  is  discerned  by  spirit,"  "  man  is  akin  to  deity,  and  is 
destined,  through  the  teaching  of  the  Word,  to  become  God." 
Such  is  the  language  he  uses.  Does  it  imply  an  identity  of 
tissence  ?  Or,  if  not,  is  man  an  emanation  of  the  Deity  ? 
Certainly  Clement  would  not  admit  either  of  tliese  views. 
He  regards  man  rather  as  a  i)roduct  of  the  Divine  Will,  yet 
not  in  the  general  sense  in  whicli  the  rest  of  creation  was 
called  into  existence,  but  as  moulded,  so  to  speak,  directly 
by  tlie  very  hands  of  God,  who  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
spirit  or  intellect,  which  is  the  Divine  "  image,"  and  man's 
possessi(jn  by  right  of  gift,  and  by  which  he  is  enabled  to 
acquire  through  virtue  tlw^  further  prerogative  of  the  Divine 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  455 

"likeness."  The  question  immediately  arises,  How  could 
such  a  being  fall  ?  Clement  replies,  Through  appetite,  of 
which  the  serpent  is  the  symbol.  But  this  answer  inevitably 
suggests  the  suspicion  that  the  body,  which  is  the  seat  of 
appetite,  is  evil.  This  again  Clement  refuses  to  allow ;  but 
it  nevertheless  remains  a  weak  point  in  his  system  that 
tlie  ground  of  man's  separation  from  God  is  not  clearly 
made  out. 

The  second  defect  follows  from  the  first.  His  theory  of 
Eedemption  does  not  take  in  all  the  facts.  He  looks  upon 
redemption  not  as  the  restitution  of  what  was  lost  at  the 
Fall,  but  as  the  "  crown  and  consummation  of  the  destiny  of 
man,  leading  to  a  righteousness  such  as  Adam  never  knew, 
and  to  heights  of  glory  and  power  as  yet  unsealed  and  un- 
dreamed." 1  In  other  words,  it  is  for  him  a  revelation  rather 
than  a  restoration.  He  does  not  apprehend  the  Church's 
doctrine  of  the  propitiation  effected  by  Christ's  death,  of  the 
efficacy  of  His  atonement  for  sin,  of  the  conveyance  to  man 
of  a  righteousness  not  his  own,  whereby  he  is  accepted  before 
God.  The  idea  of  retribution  is  foreign  to  him,  as  is  that  of 
an  expiatory  sacrifice.  He  admits  that  Christ  by  His  death 
ransoms  us  from  the  powers  of  evil,  and  bestows  forgiveness 
of  pre-baptismal  sin,  but  he  teaches  the  baptized  Christian 
to  look  "  not  upon  the  Crucified,  but  upon  the  llisen  Lord, 
the  fountain,  not  of  pardon,  but  of  life."  ^  The  great  fact  of 
man's  reconciliation  to  God  through  the  power  of  Christ's 
death  and  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel  is  all  but  left  out  of 
sight.  He  thus  emphasises  one  part  of  the  Kedeemer's  work 
at  the  expense  of  another,  equally  necessary  to  salvation. 

His  third  defect  is  less  vital,  but  still  important.  It  con- 
sists in  his  inadequate  appreciation  of  faith  as  the  means 
of  apprehending  God.  No  doubt  he  is  inconsistent  With 
himself  on  this  point.  He  speaks  sometimes  as  S.  Paul 
might  have  spoken,  as  when  he  says,  "  Wisdom  changes  its 
name  according  to  its  diverse  applications.  When  mount- 
ing up  to  first  causes  it  is  called  intelligence ;  it  becomes 

1  See  Bigg,  Christian  Platonists,  p.  75. 
2  Christian  Platonists,  p.  T2>. 


456  ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

science  wlicn  fortifying  intelligence  by  reasoning  ;  and  faith 
when,  concentrated  on  holiness,  it  envisages  the  primordial 
Word,  without  as  yet  seeing  Him,  beinc^  limited  by  the 
conditions  of  the  world."  But,  as  a  rule,  his  estimate  of 
faith  is  far  too  low.  He  relegates  it  to  the  sphere  of  opinion, 
of  half-persuasion  of  the  truth  of  Christ's  promises;  so  that, 
wlien  knowledge  is  reached,  faith  has  no  longer  a  place  in 
the  i>urilied  soul,  which  has  now  outgrown  its  s})here.  This 
is  the  mystic  element  in  Clement's  thought ;  the  vision  of 
I)ivine  truth  opened  to  the  Gnostic  is  so  perfect  that 
nothing  further  is  desired.  Earth  becomes  heaven — the  soul 
lies  in  wakeful  rest  within  the  liLrht  of  God. 


His  Extant  Works. 

We  shall  devote  a  few  pages  to  an  account  of  the 
writings  from  which  the  foregoing  principles  are  drawn. 
Clement's  systematic  teaching  is  contained  in  the  series  of 
works  already  mentioned,  viz.,  the  Protrepticus,  Poedagogus, 
and  Stromateis.  These  correspond  to  the  three  stages 
of  initiation  into  the  heathen  mysteries,  a  process  which 
Clement  had  more  than  once  gone  through,  and  which  left  a 
profound  impression  upon  his  mind.^  The  first  stage  was 
called  uTTOKadapaif;,  or  purification,  by  which  the  soul  was 
freed  from  error  and  made  to  see  its  need  of  higher  truth  ; 
the  second  was  fivrjaLc,  the  initiatory  rite,  almost  always 
symbolic  of  some  secret  power  of  Nature,  or  some  feature  in 
the  spirit's  destiny ;  the  third  was  eTroTrreia,  or  the  com- 
munication of  essential  truths  without  the  disguise  of  parable 
or  myth.  Clement  makes  the  successive  stages  of  his  teach- 
ing answer  broadly  to  these  three  divisions. 

'  JS.  I'aul  several  times  speaks  of  mysteries  in  connection  with  the  Chris- 
tian faith.  He  can  hardly  have  used  the  word  without  reference  to  its 
universal  meaning  among  the  Gentiles.  He  also  speaks  (as  docs  S.  John) 
of  a  mystery  of  iniquity.  Hence  tlie  idea  of  the  Christian  teacher  as  a 
Mystapopue  or  Initiator  is  not  unnatural.  To  Clement,  as  to  8.  Paul,  the 
mystery  was  the  sj)iritual  revelation  clearly  apjirehended  by  gnosis,  be- 
lievotl  by  fjiith.     It  was  not,  as  later,  applied  to  sacraments. 


CLEMENT   OF  ALEXANDRIA.  457 


The  Protrepticus. 

The  Protrepticus  is  an  analysis  of  mythological  and  philo- 
sophical ideas,  with  a  demonstration  of  their  erroneousness 
and  an  indication  of  the  path  of  truth  and  holiness.  It  is 
addressed  to  Gentile  inquirers.  The  Paedagogus  is  a  sketch 
of  the  discipline  of  the  soul  as  carried  on  by  the  indwelling 
Word.  ^  It  consists  of  three  books.  The  first  treats  of  the 
generr.l  principles  of  God's  government  and  the  evolution 
of  righteousness  in  human  nature.  The  second  and  third 
descend  to  particular  examples,  and  trace  the  working  of 
Christ's  discipline  in  all  departments  of  the  Christian's  life. 
It  is  an  unsystematic  but  tolerably  complete  repertory  of 
Christian  ethics,  such  as  was  suitable  for  intelligent  cate- 
chumens. The  Stromateis  comprise  eight  books  of  philoso- 
phical and  theological  discussions  on  the  higher  life  of  gnosis. 
The  topics  are  not  presented  in  any  definite  order,  but  arise 
naturally  out  of  the  train  of  thought.  They  are  to  a  great 
extent  controversial,  and  doubtless  embody  the  substance  of 
his  esoteric  teaching  to  those  who  had  embraced  the  spiritual 
ideal  of  the  true  Gnostic.  The  eighth  book  is  of  a  wholly 
different  character,  and  in  its  present  incomplete  form 
consists  merely  of  a  series  of  logical  definitions,  apparently 
intended  as  introductory  to  a  minute  examination  of  heathen 
philosophical  systems.  It  is  believed  by  many  critics  to 
belong  more  properly  to  some  other  work,  perhaps  the 
Hypotyposes,  to  which  it  may  have  been  the  prelude.  This 
hypothesis  is  partly  confirmed  by  the  assertion  at  the  close 
of  the  seventh  book  of  the  Stromateis,  that  he  is  about  to 
proceed  with  his  argument  from  a  fresh  beginning.^ 

The  Protrepticus  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  an  apolo- 
getic treatise,  and  it  may  be  well  in  connection  with  it 
to  state  briefly  the  main  features  of  Clement's  apologetic 
method.  This  may  be  characterised  as  at  once  sympathetic 
and  incisive.     He  does  not,  like  so  many  apologists,  content 


1  The  classical  reader  will  be  reminded  of  the  commencenient  of  the 
seventh  book  of  Aristotle's  Ethics,  which  opens  in  the  same  way. 


458         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

himself  wiili  denouncing  heathen  mythology,  but  traces  it  to 
its  source,  justilies  his  strictures  by  a  most  ample  quotation 
of  its  autliurities,  and  recognises  the  truth  as  well  as  the 
falsehood  of  many  of  its  conclusions.  He  dwells  especially 
on  the  value  of  philosophy  as  proving  the  inadequacy  of  the 
unassisted  reason  to  attain  the  fulness  of  truth.  His  treat- 
ment of  this  part  of  his  subject  is  particularly  brilliant. 
His  thorou^di  familiarity  with  classic  antiquity^  makes  him 
linger  willi  delight  over  passages  which  he  cites  only  to  re- 
veal their  weakness.  He  cannot  forget,  and  would  not  if  he 
could,  the  unequalled  charm  of  that  rich  literary  inheritance 
which  CJod  had  Lfivcn  to  Hellas  to  trade  with  till  He  came 
to  reclaim  His  own  with  usury.  He  willingly  admits  the 
action  of  the  Divine  Word  in  her  poetry  and  speculative 
thought,  as  willingly  as  he  admits  it  in  the  prophetic  litera- 
ture of  the  Jews.  But  he  injures  the  force  of  this  admis- 
sion by  his  theory  that  the  Greek  thinkers  borrowed  from 
Moses,  a  superficial  view  which  he  borrows  from  Justin, 
without  troubling  himself  to  sift  it.  It  is  an  excrescence 
in  his  system,  and  really  inconsistent  with  it.  His  genuine 
thought  is  expressed  by  the  assertion  that  prophecy  and 
philosophy  came  from  the  same  source:  that  the  highest 
minds  have  always  and  everywhere  been  God's  servants,  and 
that  what  the  Law  was  for  the  Jews,  philosophy  was  for  the 
Greeks,  namely,  a  schoolmaster  to  bring  them  to  Christ.  He 
enforces  this  by  an  application  of  the  Psalmist's  words  that 
the  oil  which  fell  on  Aaron's  beard  signifies  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  that  which  dropped  on  the  skirts  of  his  clothing 
refers  to  the  philosophy  of  the  Gentiles.  The  fundamental 
principle  of  the  Trotrepticus  is  the  essential  affinity  between 
the  Word  and  the  human  spirit,  and  its  object  is  to  show 
how  the  interrupted  harmony  may  be  re-established.  Its 
faults  consist  in  its  over-idealism,  its  conception  of  reve- 
lation   too   much  as  a  system  of  truth  and  too  little  as  a 

>  This  nmst  be  understood  to  refer  to  (Ireek  literature  only.  Of  ac- 
(piaintanee  with  R<jman  literatiirc  there  is  not  a  trace.  This  is  of  the  less 
imiiortance.  because  in  the  field  with  which  Clement  deals  that  literature 
was  ab.solutely  barren. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  459 

redemption  from  sin,  and  in  its  over- strained  brilliancy  of 
expression,  which  too  often  obscures  the  thoughts. 


The  Paedagogus. 

None  of  his  works  is  pervaded  by  a  more  genial  tone  than 
this.  The  thought  that  underlies  it  is  both  joyous  and  fruit- 
ful of  result.  It  is  Christ  as  the  Educator  of  the  human 
race :  the  ever-present  enlightener  of  its  intelligence,  the 
trainer  of  its  capacity  for  virtue.  The  germ  of  this  idea  is 
to  be  sought  in  S.  Paul's  account  of  Law  as  a  Tutor  which 
prepared  the  Jews  for  Christ.  But  Clement  works  it  out  in  a 
different  way.  For  him  Christ  is  the  Tutor,  and  Law  is  one 
of  His  methods.  But  not  the  only  one.  All  the  varied  issues 
of  man's  life  are  woven  into  the  Divine  plan  of  amelioration. 
Poetry,  art,  wealth,  patriotism,  ambition,  success,  defeat :  all 
have  their  formative  purpose  ;  all  contribute  to  prepare  for  the 
final  stage,  which  is  conscious  effort  towards  perfection,  con- 
scious union  of  humanity  as  one  divinely-created  brother- 
hood marching  forward  to  the  inheritance  won  for  it  by  its 
Elder  Brother  Christ. 

This  is  in  truth  a  noble  optimism.  And  we  emphasise 
with  pleasure  the  exhilaration  of  soul  which  two  centuries 
of  pure  Christianity  had  aroused  in  its  most  accomplished 
spokesman.  Clement  resolutely  fixes  his  gaze  on  the  bright 
side  of  human  destiny :  the  side  which  S.  Paul  had  so  mag- 
nificently inaugurated,  when  he  announced  to  the  Christian 
community  that  "  ye  are  Christ's,  and  Christ  is  God's." 

The  succession  of  early  apologists  which  begins  with  the 
unknown  writer  to  Diognetus,  and  is  continued  by  Justin, 
Athenagoras,  and  Pantajnus,  finds  in  Clement  its  most 
eloquent  exponent.  But  already  the  signs  of  the  times  are 
changing.  A  growing  sense  of  man's  guilt,  with  a  conscious- 
ness of  his  remoteness  from  God,  stamps  with  a  far  sadder 
tone  the  writings  of  the  great  men  that  follow.  In  Origeu 
its  influence  is  already  felt,  in  Tertullian  and  Cyprian  it 
alternates  with  exultant  hope  ;  but  in  spite  of  a  deeper 
psychology,  in  spite  of  a  more  heroic  sainthood,  few  if  any 


46o         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

of  succeeding  writers  preserve  so  much  of  that  pure  free 
consciousness  of  the  Father's  houndless  love,  which  is  the 
immortal  breath  of  the  sayings  of  Christ. 

The  second  and  third  books  of  the  Paedagogus  form  a  rich 
mine  of  information  as  to  the  social  customs  of  Clement's 
day.  Many  of  the  particulars  are  trivial ;  others  tediously 
minute ;  others  again  are  enlivened  by  touches  of  playful 
satire.  But  though  they  cover  the  ground  of  casuistry,  their 
tone  is  the  reverse  of  casuistical.  The  details  are  throughout 
vivified  by  the  consciousness  of  a  great  principle,  and  are 
never  intended  to  enslave  the  judgment  or  fetter  the  liberty 
of  the  Christian. 

At  the  close  of  the  work  are  appended  two  short  pieces  in 
verse — the  first  a  hymn  to  the  Word,  in  anapaestic  measure, 
which  may  possibly  be  genuine  ;  the  second  an  apostrophe  to 
Christ  "  the  Tutor,"  in  iambics,  which  has  all  the  characters  of 
an  academical  exercise.  In  neither  is  there  sufficient  poetical 
merit  to  call  for  any  comment. 

The  Stromateis. 

The  Stromateis  are  Clement's  longest  work  ;  and  in  them 
we  see  his  ideas  at  their  widest  range  and  highest  level. 
In  spite  of  its  desultory  character,  the  treatise  is  pervaded 
by  the  same  general  plan  as  his  other  books.  Its  central 
thought  is  the  ability  of  the  Gospel  to  fulfil  all  the  desires 
of  men,  and  to  raise  to  a  supreme  unity  all  the  objects  of 
the  Christian  philosopher's  knowledge.  To  give  an  analysis 
of  its  contents  would  exceed  the  limits  of  our  chapter.  The 
summary  of  Clement's  theology  already  supplied  will  have 
presented  to  the  reader  the  chief  results  of  investigation 
pursued  in  the  Stromateis  in  an  unsystenuitic  way.  At  its 
close  he  draws  a  sharp  contrast  between  his  own  method 
and  that  of  the  heathen  sages.  While  they  begin  from  man, 
and  work  up  as  they  believe  to  God,  he  begins  willi  ihe 
Word  and  sliows  how  man's  true  nature  is  revealed  in  Him. 
While  they  end  liy  imagining  gods  like  themselves,  and  so 
remain  ignorant  c)f  the  true  Deity,  he,  following  the  lead  of 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA.  461 

the  Word,  raises  man  to  his  genuine  self,  and  so  makes  him 
like  the  Son  of  God. 

The  great  reputation  achieved  by  Clement,  combined  with 
his  gentle  and  peaceable  character,  raised  him  high  in  the 
estimation  of  the  Church.  Popular  opinion  reckoned  him 
among  the  saints,  and  he  was  commemorated  in  the  early 
Western  Martyrologies  on  Dec.  4.  His  name  was,  however, 
erased  from  the  list  by  Clement  VIII.,  and  the  omission 
defended  by  Benedict  XIV.,  on  the  ground  that  some  parts 
of  his  teaching  were  open  to  suspicion,  and  that  mere  popular 
cultus  did  not  constitute  a  sufficient  claim  to  insertion  in  the 
Calendar.  The  only  wonder  is  that  this  step  was  not  taken 
loncj  before.  His  excellences  and  defects  are  alike  such  as 
would  place  him  out  of  sympathy  with  the  prevailing  spirit 
of  Latin  Christianity. 


CHArTER  III. 

ORIGEN  (a.d.  185-253). 

Taut  I. 

Clement  was  succeeded  in  the  headship  of  the  Catechetical 
school  by  Origen,  the  most  interesting,  the  most  learned, 
and  in  some  respects  the  greatest  of  patristic  writers.  So 
gi'cat  indeed  is  he,  that  in  the  Greek  Church  Athanasius 
alone  can  be  placed  above  him,  being  fully  his  equal  in  clear- 
ness and  depth  of  thought,  and  his  superior  in  theological 
soundness.  Chrysostom  and  Gregory  excel  him  in  eloquence, 
but  yield  to  him  in  learning.  Of  Western  writers,  three  only 
are  worthy  of  comparison  with  him :  TertuUian,  who  sur- 
passes him  in  force  and  grasp  as  much  as  he  falls  below  him 
in  breadth  of  mind;  Jerome,  who  follows  him  not  unworthily 
in  the  field  of  scholarship ;  and  Augustine,  who  stands  above 
him  in  boldness  of  thought,  splendour  of  language,  and  dog- 
matic genius,  but  is  inferior  to  him  in  larf^eness  of  heart  and 
single-minded  striving  after  truth.  Yet  this  man,  who,  as 
Mosheim  says,  deserved,  if  any  ever  did,  the  title  of  saint,* 
has  come  down  to  us  with  a  damaged  reputation.  Not  only 
is  the  beatific  prefix  withheld  from  his  name,  but  from  his 
own  time  until  the  present  both  his  conduct  and  opinions, 
especially  the  latter,  have  been  stigmatised  as  highly  repre- 
hensible by  some  of  the  highest  authorities  in  the  Church. 
It  is  true  tliat  a  few,  and  those  among  the  greatest,  held  liim 
innocent  of  the  charges  made  against  him.  It  is  sulliciont  to 
mentif)n  Athanasius  among  Greek  Fathers,  and  Jerome,  in  his 
earlier  and  truer  days,  among  Latin.    But  where  the  judgment 

*  His  words  are,  "Certainly,  if  any  man  deserves  to  stand  first  in  the 
catalogue  of  saints  and  martyrs,  and  to  be  annually  held  up  as  an  example 

to  Christians,  this  is  the  man." 

46a 


ORIGEN.  463 

is  so  diverse,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume  some  imperfection 
in  the  subject  of  it.  And  this  the  most  zealous  admirer 
of  Origen  is  compelled  to  admit.  In  the  brief  sketch  of  his 
system  which  is  all  that  the  limits  of  our  work  permit,  the 
watchful  reader  will  not  fail  to  discern  elements  of  inconsis- 
tency, vagueness,  and  unauthorised  freedom  of  thought,  many 
of  them  highly  seductive,  but  dangerous  in  proportion  to  their 
attractiveness. 

General  Considerations. 

It  will  be  desirable  at  the  outset  to  bring  forward  two 
considerations  which,  in  justice  to  Origen,  ought  never  to  be 
lost  sight  of  in  criticising  his  views. 

In  the  first  place,  he  lived  in  an  age  of  transition,  before 
the  relations  between  the  Church  and  the  individual  had 
been  clearly  defined.  Dogma  was  still  in  the  making ;  and 
though  on  certain  fundamental  points  the  Church's  teaching 
was  sufficiently  clear,  yet  on  others  scarcely  less  important 
no  decisive  pronouncement  had  been  made.  With  regard 
to  these  Origen  holds  himself  free  to  exercise  his  reason, 
restrained  only  by  the  supreme  arbitrament  of  Scripture. 
In  the  second  place,  his  mind  was  stamped  with  the  most 
distinct  individuality ;  it  was  trained  by  the  severest  study 
and  lighted  with  the  purest  glow  of  enthusiasm  for  truth  :  and 
it  strove  with  unceasing  energy  to  express  the  truth  it  held 
in  terms  of  the  cultivated  intelligence. 

It  is  only  to  be  expected  that  such  a  mind,  moving  amid 
subjects  of  surpassing  grandeur  and  difficulty,  should  reach 
some  conclusions  which  the  general  religious  sense  refused  to 
endorse.  The  errors  of  Origen's  speculation,  numerous  as  they 
are,  must  be  taken  together  with  his  permanent  contributions 
to  theology,  and  both  connected  with  his  entire  system,  as 
jointly  expressing  the  results  of  a  thorough  investigation 
into  what  he  believed  to  be  the  principles  of  revealed  truth. 
A  mind  so  many-sided,  a  personality  so  peculiar,  must  needs 
afford  material  for  conflicting  judgments ;  but  to  whichever 
side  our  own  bias  inclines,  it  will  be  well  to  reflect  how  vast 
is  the  Church's  debt  to  a  thinker  who  has  approached  the 


464  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

entire  field  of  religious  knowledge  with  the  sole  desire  to 
discover  truth,  imd  lias  expressed  with  absolute  sincerity  the 
processes  of  his  own  mind. 


His  Life— First  Period. 

Origenes  or  Origen  ^  was  born  at  Alexandria,  a.d.  185,  of 
Christian  parents.  His  father,  Leonides,  was  a  man  of  piety, 
but  not  a  ])igot.  He  allowed  his  son  to  attend  the  puldic 
schools,  and  gain  his  secular  culture  from  the  best  heathen 
masters.  But  his  boy's  religious  education  he  reserved  for 
himself,  convinced  that  those  studies  which  the  father  takes 
into  his  own  hands  will  appear  to  the  son  also  the  most 
important.  Nor  was  he  disappointed.  A  rare  soul  blos- 
somed beneath  his  care.  While  still  a  mere  child,  he  aston- 
ished his  father  by  his  insight  into  the  Divine  Word,  and 
perplexed  him  by  his  penetrating  questions.  Already  he 
expressed  dissatisfaction  with  the  literal  meanin<x,  and  sought 
always  for  the  hidden  sense.  His  father  felt  it  necessary  to 
administer  a  gentle  reproof ;  but  in  secret  he  blessed  God  for 
the  gift  of  such  a  child,  and  sometimes,  while  the  boy  slept, 
he  would  creep  into  his  chamber,  and  reverently  kiss  the 
bosom  which  he  recognised  as  a  shrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

The  Christian  child  ripened  into  a  pure  and  heavenly- 
minded  youth.  Untouched  ])y  tlie  moral  corruption  around 
him,  his  ardent  soul  l)urned  only  with  the  desire  of  Divine 
knowledge.  He  had  already  become  a  communicant  before 
his  father  died.  He  had  listened  to  the  lofty  teaching  ot 
J\intrcnus,  and  afterwards  to  the  genial  wisdom  of  Clement. 

'  The  name  is  derived  from  Or  or  Horus,  an  Eixyptian  deity  identified 
witli  Apollo.  It  may  seem  strange  that  a  Christian  should  call  his  son 
after  a  heathen  god,  but  the  practice  was  as  common  then  as  it  has  been 
in  later  times.  Origcn  is  also  called  Adamantius.  Whether  this  wjis  his 
second  name,  as  Eusebius  aflirms,  or  an  epithet  expressive  of  his  '*  invin- 
cible" industry,  as  Jerome  thoright,  is  uncertain;  most  probably  the 
former.  So  with  Ignatius,  of  whose  other  name,  Theophorus,  there  arc 
similar  conflicting  explanations.  The  loyal  devotion  of  admirers  ever  longs 
to  find  a  correspondence  between  the  signification  of  the  name  and  the 
life  of  him  who  bears  it.  This  is  abundantly  illustrated  from  both  .sacred 
and  profane  history. 


ORIGEN.  465 

Among  his  fellow-pupils  was  young  Alexander,  who  became 
in  later  days  Bishop  of  Jerusalem.  The  two  youths  became 
fast  friends,  and  this  friendship  was  a  haven  of  refuge  to 
Origen  in  the  greatest  trial  of  his  life.  In  Clement's  gifted 
circle  he  could  not  fail  to  rise  to  a  high  conception  of  the 
responsibility  of  the  intellect  in  matters  of  faith.  Before 
his  student  days  were  over,  he  had  conceived  the  idea  of 
reconciling  the  claims  of  religion  with  those  of  science.  To 
this  grand  object  he  devoted  his  entire  life. 

It  was  in  the  year  202,  the  tenth  of  Severus,  that  persecu- 
tion broke  out  after  a  long  respite.  Nowhere  was  it  fiercer 
than  in  Alexandria,  and  nowhere  was  it  faced  with  more 
undaunted  courage.  Among  the  victims  was  Leonides,  whose 
ample  property  invited  the  confiscator's  greed.  The  youth 
of  sixteen  resolved  to  share  his  father's  fate.  He  was  on  the 
point  of  delivering  himself  to  the  authorities  when  his  mother, 
by  hiding  his  clothes,  compelled  him  to  forego  the  glory  of 
a  martyr's  death.  He  wrote  to  his  father,  urging  him  to 
stand  firm.  "  See  to  it "  (he  said)  "  that  thou  change  not  thy 
purpose  on  our  account." 

His  father's  death  left  the  family  destitute.  The  rest 
were  provided  for,  we  know  not  how.  Origen  was  received 
into  the  house  of  a  wealthy  Christian  lady,  who  treated  him 
as  her  son.  Here  he  was  thrown  into  the  company  of  one 
Paulus,  a  Gnostic  teacher,  who  had  acquired  an  ascendency 
over  the  mind  of  his  benefactress.  With  this  man,  so  soon 
as  he  saw  the  drift  of  his  teaching,  Origen  refused  to  hold 
any  intercourse.^  He  therefore  found  it  necessary  to  leave 
his  comfortable  home,  and  to  work  for  an  independence. 
This  he  was  easily  enabled  to  do.  His  thorough  knowledge 
of  grammar  and  philosophy  encouraged  him  to  set  up  a 
grammatical  school.^    The  experiment  was  at  once  successful, 

1  Three  points  in  bis  teaching  were  especially  hateful  to  Origen:  first, 
his  use  of  Christian  terms,  while  emptying  them  of  meaning  ;  second,  his 
complete  suppression  of  the  moral  requirements  of  Christianity ;  and 
third,  his  denial  of  divine  and  human  liberty.  The  repulsion  from  this  here- 
tic's doctrines  can  be  traced  in  many  departments  of  Origcn's  philosophy. 

^  By  "grammar"  is  meant  here  not  the  elements  merely,  but  chiefly 
the  higher  departments  of  criticism  and  exegesis. 

2  G 


466         ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

and  resulted  in  a  revenue  sufficient  to  allow  of  liis  purchas- 
ing a  large  and  valuable  lil)rary.  The  constancy  of  the 
martyrs  had  deeply  impressed  the  more  serious-minded  of 
the  heathen.  Several  students,  among  them  Plutarch,  a 
future  martyr,  and  his  brother  Heraclas,  future  Bishop  of 
Alexandria,  were  seized  with  a  desire  to  be  instructed  in  the 
Word  of  God.  They  applied  to  the  Catechetical  school ;  but 
finding  it  closed,  owing  to  Clement's  retirement,  they  turned 
to  Origen,  whose  seniors  they  were  by  several  years,  but 
under  whom  they  willingly  placed  themselves.  Demetrius, 
the  bishop,  perceiving  his  extraordinary  aptitude  for  teach- 
ing, took  the  strong  step  of  appointing  him,  though  scarcely 
eighteen  years  of  age,  to  the  Catechetical  chair. 

Hardly  had  the  boy-teacher  settled  down  to  his  work  when 
the  persecution  broke  out  again.  It  became  impossible  to  meet 
in  public.  The  lectures  were  carried  on  within  closed  doors, 
which  might  at  any  moment  be  forced  by  an  armed  guard 
and  the  students  led  to  execution.  It  is  wonderful  that 
under  such  conditions  the  tolerant  spirit  of  the  Alexandrian 
school  was  not  exchanged  for  ])igotry.  Tribulation,  which 
purifies  Chri^-tian  conduct,  is  not  always  so  favourable  to 
Christian  theology.  That  it  had  no  cramping  efiect  in  this 
instance,  is  due  to  the  influence  of  Origen,  who  never 
swerved  from  his  ideal  of  moral  purity,  combined  with 
divine  wisdom. 

His  example  was  consistent  with  his  teaching.  Far  from 
avoiding  danger,  he  was  the  first  to  court  it.  Every  day 
he  was  seen  at  the  prison  doors  comforting  and  exhorting 
the  captives.  He  walked  l)y  their  side  to  the  place  of  tor- 
ture, and  gave  them  the  last  kiss.  Among  the  mart}TS  was 
his  pupil  riutarch,  who  was  well  known  and  popular  in  the 
city.  The  people  were  infuriated  at  his  death,  of  which  they 
held  Origen  to  be  the  cause.  Many  times  they  set  upon  him, 
and  would  have  torn  him  in  pieces,  but  on  each  occasion  he 
was  rescued  from  their  hands.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  the  safety  of  one  so  poor  and  so  useful  as  a  provider  of 
wealthy  victims  was  studiously  watched  over  by  the  gover- 
nor.   At  length  the  storm  passed,  and  the  school  was  able  to 


ORIGEN.  467 

reassemble.  Its  popularity  was  greater  than  ever.  The  young 
catechist  threw  himself  into  his  work  with  an  ardour  almost 
superhuman.  The  whole  day  and  no  small  part  of  the  night 
were  given  to  labour.  But  this  was  not  enough.  He  deter- 
mined to  carry  out  his  moral  ideal  to  the  uttermost.  He 
absolutely  refused  all  salary  and  all  gifts.  He  sold  his 
library,  the  sole  fruit  of  his  earnings,  in  exchange  for  a 
life-pension  of  four  obols  (about  sixpence)  a  day.  On  this 
pittance  the  scholar  and  the  gentleman  contrived  to  subsist. 
Needless  to  say,  his  fare  was  of  the  scantiest.  Animal  food 
and  wine  he  never  touched.  His  couch  was  the  bare  ground. 
Accepting  Christ's  command  to  His  Apostles  as  meant  for 
himself,  he  wore  but  one  garment ;  and,  by  a  stretch  of 
literalism  extraordinary  in  the  champion  of  allegorical  in- 
terpretation, he  committed  an  act  of  self-mutilation  which, 
however  well  intended  as  a  precaution  against  scandal,  it  is 
impossible  to  do  otherwise  than  condemn. 

But  we  must  not  imagine  that  he  made  a  parade  of  his 
austerity.  Nothing  would  be  further  from  the  truth.  No 
Father  of  the  Church  is  more  truly  humble-minded,  more 
completely  free  from  affectation  or  religious  pride.  But  there 
were  two  defects  in  his  theological  equipment  which  seriously 
detract  from  the  value  of  his  results.  The  first  is  his  too 
intimate  assimilation  of  the  various  heathen  systems  of 
thought,  which  tinged  his  ideal  of  self-renunciation  with  the 
corrupt  leaven  of  asceticism — a  practice  based  on  the  non- 
Christian  hypothesis  of  the  impurity  of  matter.  The  second 
is  his  deficiency  in  the  ruling  faculty  of  judgment.  "With  all 
his  ardour  for  truth,  his  acuteness,  his  learning,  his  logical 
and  metaphysical  power,  he  lacked  the  master  gifts  of 
originality  and  mental  strength.  He  must  be  pronounced 
inferior  to  Clement  in  the  former,  and  to  Tertullian  in  the 
latter.  These  defects  run  through  all  his  system,  and  account 
for,  though  tliey  do  not  justify,  the  severe  denunciations  of 
his  enemies. 

At  present,  however,  they  were  not  apparent  to  the  world. 
In  Alexandria  his  fame  was  extraordinary.  The  most  illus- 
trious professors  could  not  rival  his  iutluence.     Not  only 


468  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF   THKOLOCiV. 

Christian  cutechunieiiH,  Ijut  learned  heathens  thronged  his 
school,  which  was  ojjcn  day  and  night  to  all  comers.  To 
deal  fairly  with  their  ditliculties,  he  thought  it  necessary  to 
acquaint  himself  with  the  most  recent  development  of  Pagan 
thought. 

Ammonius  Sacas,  the  renowned  founder  of  Neo-Platonism, 
was  expounding  to  crowded  audiences  the  seductive  prin- 
ciples  of  his  system.  Origen  attended  his  lectures,  and  made 
himself  master  of  this  striking  attempt  at  combining  the 
])hiloso])]iic  tradition  of  Greece,  and  more  especially  Platon- 
ism,  with  the  theosophic  aspirations  of  the  time.  He  had 
no  scruple  in  doing  this.  In  his  eyes  it  was  not  only  fair 
warfare  to  study  the  enemy's  tactics,  but  it  was  the  duty  of 
a  conscientious  defender  of  the  faith  not  to  reject  the  oppor- 
tunity of  learning  at  first  hand  ideas  which  professed  to 
satisfy  the  same  needs  of  man's  nature  as  his  own.  Had  all 
apologists  of  Christianity  been  equally  honest,  religion  and 
science  would  not  have  l)een  in  their  present  position  of 
mutual  distrust.  In  the  school  of  Ammonius  he  formed  the 
acquaintance  of  a  young  man  named  Porphyry,  who  was 
destined  to  become  the  most  formidable  of  all  the  antagonists 
of  Christianity.  It  is  pleasant  to  know  that  their  impres- 
sions were  mutually  favourable,  though  there  is  some  justice 
in  I*orphyry's  remark  that  "  Origen's  discussions  on  theology 
are  carried  on  after  the  manner  of  the  Greeks."^ 

A  young  man,  however  ardent  his  zeal,  and  however 
immense  his  industry,  cannot  long  continue  to  bear  with 
im])unity  so  severe  a  strain.  The  attenuated  form  and  over- 
l)rilliant  eye  told  of  injured  health.  Origen's  friends,  and 
among  them  the  bishop,  desired  that  he  should  have  some 
rest.  He  had  long  wished  to  see  the  Church  of  the  world's 
capital.  To  Home,  accordingly,  he  directed  his  steps.  The 
Pontiff  was  Zephyrinus,  a  man  of  infirm  character  and  little 
learning,  but  hospitable  and  kindly.  We  can  liardly  doubt 
that  he  leceived  a  teacher  so  distinguishetl  with  at  least 
outward  honour,  liut  it  is  clear  that  Origen  was  little 
satisfied  with  his  visit.     If  we  except  Hippolytus,  and  that 

'  IIo  means,  of  course,  lieatlicn  Greeks. 


ORIGEN.  469 

shadowy  personage  Caius  the  presbyter,  he  would  scarcely 
find  at  Eome  one  kindred  spirit. 

Not  only  were  the  externals  of  church-life  dwelt  on  with 
an  emphasis  which  to  him  must  have  seemed  wholly  dispro- 
portionate, but  the  tumult  of  worldly  policy  and  ambitious 
projects  which  centred  in  the  Papal  chair  evidently  shocked 
and  angered  him.  Of  the  few  bitter  remarks  that  fell  from 
his  pen,  the  bitterest  are  directed  against  the  traffic  in  holy 
things  which  he  witnessed  for  the  first  time  in  Eome.  It 
is  certainly  significant  that  neither  he  nor  Tertullian  nor 
Jerome  could  remain  on  a  friendly  footing  with  the  Eoman 
clergy.  It  is  equally  significant  that,  while  Tertullian  and 
Jerome  are  unsparing  of  individuals  but  have  not  a  word  to 
say  against  the  system,  Origen  never  once  alludes  to  an 
individual,  while  to  the  system  he  only  vouchsafes  the  tribute 
of  a  half-regretful,  half-contemptuous  allusion.  The  fact  is 
that  Origen  and  the  Eoman  Church  were  wide  as  the  poles 
apart.  To  him  the  Christian  religion  was  a  system  of  Divine 
truth  thought  out  by  reason ;  to  them  it  was  a  Divine  polity 
imposed  by  authority.  The  attitude  of  Origen  to  Eome  was 
curiosity  exchanged  for  indifference ;  the  attitude  of  Eome 
to  Origen  was  suspicion  followed  by  condemnation. 

On  his  return  to  Alexandria  he  resumed  his  labours  with 
undiminished  zeal.  The  number  of  hearers  was  so  great,  that 
in  order  to  secure  leisure  for  his  own  reading  he  found  it 
necessary  to  divide  his  work.  He  took  into  partnership  his 
former  pupil  Heraclas,  to  whom  he  committed  the  junior 
department,  reserving  for  himself  the  higher  class  of  pro- 
ficients. By  this  step  he  was  enabled  to  complete  his  system 
of  Christian  education,  a  system  of  which  it  may  safely  be 
said  that  nothing  like  it  was  known  in  the  ancient  church, 
and  nothing  superior  to  it  exists  in  the  modern.  In  estimat- 
ing its  worth,  regard  should  be  had  to  its  object.  Thougli 
nominally  a  scheme  of  training  for  Christian  converts,  it  was 
practically  a  seminary  for  the  production  of  Christian  divines 
or  philosophers.  It  must  therefore  be  compared  not  with 
schemes  of  secular  education  as  such,  but  rather  with  the 
whole  course  of  training  ending  with  the  seminary  or  the 


470  ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL  OF   THEOLOGY. 

theological  coHcl^c,  which  prepares  young  men  for  the 
ministry.  We  owe  to  Origen's  devoted  pupil  Gregory  of 
Neo  -  Cassarea  an  incomplete  but  glowing  account  of  his 
educational  mctliod. 


(//.)  His  Educational  Method. 

Ilis  lirst  step  was  always  to  understand  the  character  of 
his  pupil,  so  as  to  present  to  him  those  aspects  of  ethical 
and  intellectual  training  which  were  best  suited  to  spur  him 
on  to  improvement.  He  then  proceeded  by  a  searching 
dialectic  to  remove  false  impressions,  prejudices,  conceit  of 
knowledge,  or  other  hindrances  to  the  unbiassed  reception 
of  truth.  Nor  did  he  trouble  himself  to  make  this  process 
pleasant,  being  wisely  convinced  that  unless  the  higher 
knowledge  be  s(jught  with  a  pure  intention,  its  acquisition 
can  do  no  real  good.  This  ^jreliminary  over,  he  placed  the 
scholar  on  the  lower  steps  of  the  ladder  of  knowledge  by 
introducing  him  to  the  principles  of  geometry.  From  thence 
he  mcninted  upwards  to  physics  and  astronomy,  attaching 
special  value  to  a  thorough  insight  into  the  orderly  sequence 
of  Nature,  without  wliich  he  held  it  impossible  to  penetrate 
to  the  more  recondite  order  of  the  moral  world.  Moral 
science  came  ne.xt,  and  here  Origen  availed  himself  of  the 
noble  example  of  heathen  moralists,  who  had  striven  to 
make  morality  not  merely  a  science  but  a  doctrine,  not 
merely  a  theory  l)ut  a  life.  This  is  what  raises  Origen  to 
the  first  rank  as  a  Christian  teacher.  He  set  himself  to 
satisfy  the  legitimate  desire  for  an  ethical  system  that  shouhl 
harmonise  the  Christian  ideal  with  the  conceptions  of  the 
I)ractical  reason.  And,  according  to  Gregory,  he  succeeded 
in  his  task.  He  not  only  made  his  disciples  see  that  Chris- 
tianity was  tlie  best  life,  but  he  himself  lived  up  to  it  and 
inspired  them  to  do  the  same.  80  far  from  de})reciating 
the  works  of  non-Christian  philosophers,  he  strongly  re- 
commended a  thorough  study  of  them,  as  an  essential 
pro-recpiisite  of  that  well-grounded  certitude  which  is  the 
(.'hristian    philosopher's    most   glorious    reward       In    cvcrv 


ORIGEN.  471 

system  he  considered  would  be  found  some  element  of  truth  ; 
and  to  draw  this  out  and  disengage  it  from  surrounding 
error  seemed  to  him  a  task  worthy  of  a  scholar  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Last  of  sciences  in  order  and  queen  in  rank  came 
Theology,  the  knowledge  of  divine  things,  to  which  logic, 
physics  and  ethics  are  handmaidens,  and  in  which  the 
philosophic  systems  find  their  meaning  and  their  goal.  The 
primal  truths  of  theology  are  embodied  in  the  Scriptures, 
interpreted  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  acting  in  the  first  instance 
in  the  Universal  Church,  and  secondarily  in  the  purified 
soul  of  the  Christian  inquirer.  He  himself  accepted  as  final 
and  absolute  those  deductions  from  Holy  Scripture  on  which 
the  entire  Church  had  definitely  pronounced.  But  outside 
these,  he  allowed  himself  and  his  disciples  the  utmost  free- 
dom of  inference,  provided  it  was  exercised  in  the  spirit  of 
prayer  and  with  the  single-minded  desire  of  truth.  He  held 
that  the  soul  of  man  was  made  to  be  nourished  on  truth, 
and  was  given  faculties  whereby  truth  was  intended  to  be 
acquired.  And  although  in  our  present  state  we  can  go  but 
a  little  way  towards  that  goal  for  which  our  true  nature 
yearns,  yet  the  impulse  is  in  itself  holy  and  divine,  and 
carries  with  it  the  pledge,  if  undeviatingly  pursued,  of  its 
ultimate  though  perhaps  distant  satisfaction.  It  may  be 
tliat  Origen  rated  too  highly  the  endowments  of  man's  nature, 
that  he  allowed  too  little  for  the  defacement  in  him  of  the 
Divine  Image  ;  but  his  error  was  that  of  a  noble  soul,  and 
sprang  from  his  sense  of  the  inherent  attractiveness  of  the 
Divine  when  once  clearly  revealed. 


(h.)  His  Theological  Studies. 

The  peaceful  and  prosperous  labours  of  the  teacher  received 
an  abrupt  check  by  the  outbreak  of  a  second  persecution  in 
the  reign  of  Caracalla  (a.d.  215).  Origen  withdrew  from 
the  danger,  and  took  refuge  at  Caesarea  in  Palestine.  Here 
the  bishop  Theoctistus,  seconded  by  Origen's  old  fellow- 
pupil  Alexander  of  Jerusalem,  preferred  a  request  that  he 
would  give  public  instruction  in  the  Scriptures  during  the 


472  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

services  of  the  church.  It  must  be  remembered  tliat  Origeu 
was  a  layman.  He  did  not,  however,  on  that  account  think 
it  necessary  to  decline  their  invitation.  Probably  the  im- 
portance of  his  action  from  a  disciplinary  view  never  occurred 
to  him.  He  was  signally  deficient  in  that  hierarchical  instinct 
which  was  rapidly  becoming  the  ruling  force  in  the  Church. 
That  he  intended  any  disrespect  to  Demetrius,  who  had 
hitherto  treated  him  with  unvarying  friendliness,  is  not  for 
a  moment  to  be  believed.  Unfortunately  Demetrius  took 
a  diflerent  view  of  his  conduct.  He  peremptorily  recalled 
him,  and  expressed  strong  disapproval  of  the  action  of  the 
Palestinian  bishops,  which  he  stigmatised,  though  ignorantly, 
as  unprecedented.  Origen  returned  to  Alexandria,  and  re- 
sumed his  former  position  (a.d.  218). 

About  this  time  he  fell  in  with  a  wealthy  Alexandrian 
named  Ambrosius  whom  he  rescued  from  heretical  opinions, 
and  who  at  once  conceived  an  ardent  aflection  for  his 
preserver.  Under  his  influence,  Origen  was  persuaded  to 
relinquish  to  a  great  extent  the  teaching  of  the  school,  and 
to  devote  himself  to  written  expositions.  For  this  purpose 
Ambrosius  provided  him  with  such  books  as  he  required, 
and  with  a  skilled  stall"  of  shorthand  writers  and  copyists  to 
transcribe  their  notes  in  full. 

From  this  epoch  commences  that  vast  succession  of  literary 
works  which  has  given  Origen  the  good  or  ill  fame  of  being 
the  most  voluminous  author  in  existence.  A  torrent  of  com- 
mentaries, homilies  and  treatises  proceeded  from  his  pen, 
amounting,  according  to  Epiphanius,  to  no  less  than  60CX), 
but  according  to  Jerome's  more  moderate  estimate  to  2000. 
A  brief  summary  of  their  titles  will  be  given  later  on.  It  is 
sufiicient  to  mention  here  that  they  covered  the  fields  of 
textual  criticism,  exegesis,  exhortation,  apologetics,  corre- 
spondence, as  well  as  every  department  of  strictly  theological 
science.  Prodigious  as  was  his  industry,  it  did  not  satisfy 
Ambrosius.  He  urged  his  friend  to  greater  and  yet  greater 
efibrts,  so  that  Origen  playfully  complains  of  his  exacting 
taskmaster.  Obviously,  however,  it  was  a  labour  of  love  on 
both  sides.     How  thorougldy  in  earnest  he  was  to  leave  no 


ORIGEN.  473 

means  untried  for  convincing  all  opponents  is  shown  by  his 
undertaking  what  to  a  Greek  must  have  been  the  most 
repulsive  of  studies,  the  acquisition  of  the  Hebrew  language. 
It  is  not  certain  how  far  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew  went. 
Probably  it  was  not  very  profound.  But  it  placed  him  at 
once  in  a  unique  position  as  a  controversialist.  The  learned 
Jews  ridiculed  the  Christian  Fathers  for  resting  their  evidence 
on  texts  which  either  did  not  exist  at  all  in  the  original,  or 
had  been  tampered  with  by  Greek  translators.  Origen  con- 
ceived the  magnificent  and  truly  scientific  idea  of  presenting 
at  one  view  the  Hebrew  text  and  all  the  leading  versions 
from  it,  so  that  every  scholar  might  judge  for  himself  of  the 
genuineness  of  every  passage  which  he  adduced  as  a  proof. 

This  gigantic  project  took  many  years  to  realise.  But  it 
was  accomplished  at  length.  He  gave  it  the  title  of  Hexapla, 
or  sixfold  rendering.  Each  page  contained  six  parallel 
columns  ;  on  the  first  was  the  Hebrew  original,  on  the  second 
the  same  in  Greek  characters,  on  the  rest  were  the  LXX 
version,  and  those  of  Aquila,  Theodotion  and  Symmachus. 
Besides  these  Origen  found  two  anonymous  versions  of  parts 
of  the  Scripture  which  he  also  inserted  for  comparison.  He 
employed  various  critical  marks  to  direct  attention  to  in- 
terpolations, divergences  or  inaccuracies.  This  work  may 
truly  be  called  the  inauguration  of  Biblical  criticism.  In 
thus  laying  the  foundations  of  a  science  which  was  resumed 
only  after  a  lapse  of  fifteen  centuries,  he  may  be  compared 
with  Aristotle,  whose  studies  in  natural  history  waited  till 
the  time  of  Linnaeus  to  receive  their  continuation.  But 
Origen  has  been  less  fortunate  than  the  philosopher  of 
Stagira  in  the  loss  to  mankind  of  nearly  all  his  research.  A 
few  fragments  alone  remain,  which  have  been  edited  by 
Field  in  a  manner  worthy  of  their  value. 

By  this  time  Origen's  fame  was  spread  throughout  the 
Christian  world.  Some  years  before,  Demetrius  had  been 
requested  to  send  him  to  Arabia  on  some  mission,  of  whicli 
the  object  is  unknown  to  us.  He  was  now  (a.d.  226)  singled 
out  for  a  higher  honour  in  being  invited  to  Antioch  by 
Mammaea,  mother  of  the  reigning  emperor  Alexander,  who 


474  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

was  de(;ply  interested  in  religious  questions,  and  desired  to 
licar  from  him  an  exposition  of  his  views.  The  splendour  of 
a  court  could  have  no  attraction  for  Origen.  He  remained 
no  loni^'er  than  was  necessary  to  satisfy  the  empress,  and 
returned  well  content  to  resume  the  thread  of  his  labours. 
These  continued  until  the  year  230,  when  he  was  invited  to 
(Jreece  on  business  connected  witli  the  spread  of  heretical 
views  in  the  Acha?an  Church. 

On  his  way  he  touched  at  Palestine  and  paid  a  visit  to 
Theoctistus  at  Cicsarea.  While  there  he  was  ordained  ])res- 
byter  by  the  bishop,  assisted  by  Alexander  of  Jerusalem. 
This  act  was  the  beginning  of  his  troubles.  The  discussion 
of  its  bearings  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  history.  We  may 
remark  that  while  it  was  natural  that  Origen  should  avail 
himself  of  his  friends'  advice  and  help,  it  was  at  least 
e(iually  natural  that  Demetrius  should  take  offence  at  what 
he  regarded  as  a  direct  invasion  of  his  prerogative.  The 
mind  of  Origen  was  not  cast  in  a  practical  mould.  Though 
he  cannot  have  been  unprepared  for  some  manifestation  of 
displeasure,  he  certainly  did  not  anticipate  the  tremendous 
storm  of  indignation  that  burst  upon  him.  Fiom  the  dis- 
ciplinary point  of  view,  J)emetrius  had  a  strong  case.  The 
rash  act  of  Origen's  youth,  though  not  calling  for  moral 
censure,  was  undoubtedly  a  technical  disqualitication  for  the 
ministry.  And  still  more  serious  a  breach  of  ecclesiastical 
('ti([uette  was  the  ordination  of  a  prominent  member  of  one 
church  by  the  Ijishop  of  another.  Probably  neither  the 
([ualifications  for  orders  nor  the  limits  of  inter-episcopal 
jurisdiction  were  as  yet  defined  by  any  authority  beyond 
that  of  mutual  understanding.  Xevertheless  the  two  bishops 
and  Origen  himself,  if  they  did  not  realise  the  gravity  of 
their  action,  ought  to  have  done  so.  The  probability  is  that 
they  did  realise  it,  and  intended  it  as  a  significant  reply  to 
the  ill-concealed  jealousy  with  which  the  Bishop  regarded 
his  too  distinguished  catechist.^     Demetrius  at  any  rate  was 

'  As  I'res.scnst'  ha.s  truly  roinarkcd,  Demetrius  was  not  envious  of  Oripen's 
intellectual  .superiority.  He  was  essentially  a  man  of  affairs,  and  probably 
had  a  pood-natured  rcveroTV"  f"-  !• -irning  and  genius,  so  lonp  a^  they  did 


ORIGEN.  475 

determined  not  to  pass  it  over.  He  did  not  forbid  Origen's 
return.  He  allowed  him  for  a  time  to  continue  unmolested 
his  commentary  on  S.  John's  Gospel.  But  so  soon  as  he  felt 
sure  of  his  ground,  he  called  a  Council  of  bishops  and  priests, 
which  ordered  the  departure  of  Origen  from  Alexandria. 
Not  satisfied  with  this,  he  afterwards  convened  another 
assembly,  which  passed  the  still  severer  sentence  of  degra- 
dation from  the  priesthood.  He  also  issued  letters  to  the 
bishops  throughout  Christendom  acquainting  them  of  his 
decision  and  the  grounds  on  which  it  rested.  The  Roman 
Church  emphatically  endorsed  his  action.  Those  of  Palestine, 
Arabia,  Phoenicia  and  Palestine,  as  emphatically  repudiated 
it.  Origen  might  well  have  withstood  his  official  superior. 
But  no  man  was  ever  less  pugnacious.  Moreover,  he  feared 
to  divide  the  Church.  He  therefore  bowed  before  the  storm 
and  quitted  Alexandria,  where  he  had  spent  a  quarter  of  a 
century  in  the  exercise  of  an  influence  altogether  unique,  and 
in  the  enjoyment  of  nearly  universal  reverence.  He  sought 
refuge  at  Cgesarea,  and  Heraclas  succeeded  him  in  the 
Catechetical  school  (a.d.  231). 

His  Life— Second  Period. 

We  now  come  to  the  second  period  of  his  life,  which  was 
no  less  fruitful  of  great  studies  than  the  first.  In  no  fewer 
than  three  departments  his  writings  had  formed  an  epoch, 
the  Hcxwpla  in  criticism,  the  Pri/icijjuc  in  dogmatics,  and  the 
Commentary  on  S.  John  in  exegesis.  In  one  other  field, 
that  of  the  homily  or  sermon,  he  had  yet  to  make  his  mark. 
It  was  strongly  against  his  wish  that  Ambrosius  published 
many  of  his  Scripture  commentaries :  his  extempore  dis- 
courses he  absolutely  forbade  to  be  taken  down,  until  he  had 
reached  the  ripe  age  of  sixty.  Great  injustice  has  been  done 
to  his  views  by  the  assumption  that  all  his  published  matter 
was  intended  to  see  the  light  and  represents  his  matured 

not  cross  his  path.  What  he  could  not  tolerate  was  the  immense  influence 
which  Origen  had  acquired,  an  influence  no  doubt  antagonistic  to  his  own — 
what  Pressense  well  calls  his  moral  episcopate. 


47^  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

thought.  Such  was  far  from  being  the  case.  And  much  as 
we  may  sympathise  with  the  enthusiastic  admiration  of 
Ambrosius,  we  are  inclined  to  think  that  he  has  injured  his 
friend's  reputation  not  a  little  by  so  strongly  pressing  him  to 
publish.  A  mind  encyclopaedic  as  Origen's  rarely  possesses 
the  literary  gift.  Like  Aristotle,  with  whom  he  presents  more 
than  one  point  of  resemblance,  he  is  far  more  concerned  with 
matter  than  with  manner,  fonder  of  suggesting  comprehen- 
sive thought  than  of  proving  a  definite  thesis.  He  has  the 
same  method  of  starling  objections  or  side-currents  of  argu- 
ment suggested  by  a  passing  allusion  or  reminiscence ;  and 
thus  gives  occasion  to  captious  critics  of  preferring  the  charge 
of  vagueness  and  inconsistency.  His  own  prepossessions 
were  decidedly  Platonic ;  but  he  wholly  lacks  the  distinctive 
qualities  of  Plato's  genius,  his  daring  indifference  to  autho- 
rity, his  imaginative  grandeur,  his  piercing  insight  int(j  the 
essence  of  things. 

In  one  respect  he  showed  himself  a  true  philosopher  and 
a  true  Christian.  He  offered  no  retaliation  for  the  indig- 
nities inflicted  on  him.  The  spiritual  vindictiveness  of 
Tertullian  and  the  spiteful  satire  of  Jerome  were  alike  far 
from  him.  A  cloud  indeed  passed  over  his  spirit,  and 
it  was  long,  he  tells  us,  l)efore  he  could  command  serenity 
of  mind  sutlicient  to  continue  his  commentary  on  S.  John, 
serenest  and  yet  most  aggressive  of  inspired  authors.  Only 
in  two  or  three  isolated  passages  does  he  betray  the  secret 
root  of  bitterness,  when  in  temperate  and  guarded  language 
he  censures  the  proud  hierarchical  spirit  which  tyrannises 
over  souls  whom  Christ  had  freed,  and  makes  those  sad  whom 
(Jod  had  not  made  sad. 

All  that  devoted  friendship  could  do  to  soothe  and  honour 
him  was  done  by  his  friends  at  Ciesarea.  His  advantages 
were  indeed  few  when  compared  with  those  he  had  enjoyed 
at  Alexandria.  Nevertlieless  he  spent  some  fruitful  years 
in  study  and  in  active  spiritual  inthience,  till  the  persecution 
under  Maximin  obliged  him  once  more  to  flee.  His  friend 
Ambrosius  was  among  those  who  were  seized  by  the  autho- 
rities  but   afterwards   released.     To   him   he   addressed   the 


ORIGEN.  477 

most  touching  and  eloquent  of  all  his  works,  the  Exlim'tation, 
to  Martyrs.  He  himself  found  an  asylum  in  Cappadocia,  at 
first  with  Bishop  Firmilian,  and  then  with  a  rich  lady  named 
Juliana,  who  had  inherited  the  splendid  library  of  Symma- 
chus.  The  deep  emotion  of  his  soul  expressed  itself  in 
another  golden  treatise,  that  On  Prayer,  which  rings  through- 
out with  the  echo  of  persecution,  and  brings  out  with 
matchless  beauty  the  ennobling  doctrine  of  the  Communion 
of  Saints. 

In  238  we  find  him  once  more  at  Caesarea,  shortly  after 
which  he  attended  a  conference  with  the  heretic  Bassus  at 
Nicomedia.  To  this  period  belongs  the  celebrated  corre- 
spondence between  him  and  Julius  Africanus,  which  will  be 
referred  to  in  the  chapter  on  Africanus.  He  is  next  seen  at 
Athens,  where  he  wrote  his  commentary  on  the  Song  of 
Songs,  of  which  Jerome  declares  that,  while  in  his  other 
writings  Origen  surpassed  all  his  contemporaries,  in  this  he 
surpassed  himself,  and  seemed  to  verify  the  mystic  words  of 
the  Song,  •'  The  King  hath  brought  me  into  His  chambers." 

He  returned  soon  after  to  Caesarea,  where  he  finished  his 
commentary  on  S.  John,  as  well  as  those  on  the  Synoptics 
and  Epistles,  and  perhaps  also  on  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel. 
Beryllus,  Bishop  of  Bostra  in  Arabia,  had  fallen  into  a  Sabel- 
lianising  view  of  the  Person  of  Christ.  It  appears  that 
the  Judaising  theosophy  of  the  Essenes  had  for  some  time 
exercised  an  injurious  influence  in  those  quarters.  In  with- 
standing this,  Beryllus  seems  to  have  fallen  into  the  opposite 
error.  He  had  been  condemned  by  a  synod,  but  did  not  feel 
disposed  to  give  way.  The  bishops  of  Aral)ia,  sincerely  de- 
sirous of  peace,  asked  Origen  to  intervene.  This  he  consented 
to  do  on  condition  that  he  might  first  learn  the  views  of 
Beryllus  from  himself.  The  heretical  bishop  and  the  con- 
demned presbyter  met  in  friendly  conference,  their  mutual 
object  not  victory  but  truth.  The  conference  issued  in 
Beryllus  confessing  his  error,  and  pul)licly  admitting  that 
the  arguments  of  Origen  liad  convinced  him.  What  a  lesson 
to  controversialists,  anatliematising  synods,  and  religious 
prosecutors ! 


478  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

About  llio  same  time  Ori<4eii  intervened  in  anuther  con- 
troversy with  even  more  eonspieuous  success.  A  heresy  had 
broken  out  in  Arabia  to  the  effect  that  the  resurrection  body 
is  a  new  creation,  not  the  same  body.  He  met  the  cliampions 
of  this  opinion,  and  confuted  them  so  persuasively  that  they 
yielded  to  his  arj^uments,  and  withdrew  from  their  heretical 
views.  It  is  probal)h'  tliat  he  wrote  in  connection  with  this 
busin(»ss  his  two  dialo^^au's  On  the  Jirsumctioii,  whieli  un- 
happily are  lost,  a  loss  which  deprives  us  of  an  important 
fe^iture  in  his  system. 

In  244  riiilip  the  Arabian  succeeded  to  the  tlirone. 
This  emperor,  if  not  a  Christian  himself,  was  eminently 
favourable  to  Christianity.  Origin  corresponded  with  him. 
Ambrosius  was  much  exercised  to  find  that  a  skilful  attack 
on  Christianity  published  more  than  fifty  years  previously  by 
Celsus  was  still  unanswered,  and  urged  Origen  to  undertake 
the  task.  Unwilling  at  first  to  enter  the  field  of  apologetics, 
he  was  hapi)ily  persuaded  to  comply.  The  work  of  Celsus 
was  specially  suited  to  engage  his  powers,  because  with 
combined  earnestness  and  skill  it  brought  to  a  focus  all 
kinds  of  objections,  serious  and  ironical,  Jewish  and  heathen, 
philosophic  and  popular,  and  handled  them  with  the  easy 
effectiveness  of  a  cultivated  man  of  the  world.  Though 
written,  like  all  his  works,  under  too  great  pressure  and 
vi'ilh  insufficient  care  for  style,  Origen's  reply  must  be  pro- 
nounced decidedly  the  strongest,  fullest,  and  most  satisfying 
of  all  apologetic  treatises.  It  is  not  only  a  mine  of  infor- 
mation on  innumerable  points  of  Pagan  and  Christian 
antiquities,  but  it  has  the  signal  merit  of  resting  the  defence 
of  the  Christian  religi(ni  (tn  the  true  ground,  namely,  the 
introduclion  of  a  new  and  organic  principle  of  righteousness 
into  human  life. 

This  was  the  last  and  in  some  respects  the  greatest  work 
of  Origen.  Sh(»rtly  after  its  publication  his  friend  And)rosius 
died.  The  companionship  of  these  two  noble  souls  is  honour- 
able to  l»(»th.  We  may  litly  eonipaie  it-  witli  that  which 
bound  lioswell  and  .Johnson  in  tlieir  otldly-assorted  intimacy. 
There  was  not,  indeed,  that  disparity  of  intellect  between 


ORIGEN.  479 

them  which  made  the  obtrusive  loquacity  of  the  little  Scot 
so  heavy  a  burden  to  his  colossal  but  impatient  comrade. 
Ambrosius  was  himself  a  scholar  of  no  mean  order,  and 
though  inclined  to  tyrannise  over  the  gentle  nature,  which 
nevertheless  he  reverenced  as  far  above  his  own,  yet  his 
sound  judgment,  to  say  nothing  of  his  unbounded  generosity 
and  stimulating  encourafrement,  must  have  been  of  immense 
service  in  drawing  forth  the  resources  of  his  gifted  friend's 
genius. 

A.D.  250. — The  Church  had  enjoyed  external  peace,  except 
for  one  brief  outburst,  for  fifty  years.  But  this  year  saw  the 
commencement  of  that  terrible  onslaught  upon  Christianity 
that  has  consigned  to  execration  the  memory  of  Decius. 
Not  as  heretofore  in  isolated  regions,  but  throughout  the 
empire,  fire  and  sword  were  systematically  employed  to 
shake  the  constancy  of  the  faithful.  Origen,  who  had  ex- 
horted others  to  endure,  who  had  twice  fled  before  the  storm, 
was  now  called  upon  to  seal  his  testimony.  Into  the  horrid 
details  of  his  sufferings  we  need  not  enter.  It  would  sufhce 
to  cover  with  infamy  a  civilisation  which  brought  such 
punishments  to  bear  upon  a  gentle  and  reflned  scholar,  now 
nearly  seventy  years  of  age,  did  we  not  recall  the  still  darker 
horror  of  a  professedly  Christian  Church  tormenting  with 
yet  more  fiendish  ingenuity  men  and  women  who  served  the 
same  God  and  acknowledged  the  same  Saviour.  Neither 
torture  nor  threats  moved  him.  He  survived  the  ordeal, 
though  with  broken  health  and  strength,  and  expired  at  Tyre 
(a.d.  253)  in  the  sixty-ninth  year  of  his  age,  where  his  grave 
was  long  the  object  of  affectionate  veneration  ;  and  even  now, 
amid  the  desolations  of  Islam,  the  poverty-stricken  fishermen 
cherish  in  their  popular  legends  the  half-forgotten  heritage 
of  his  great  name. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

ORIGEN:  HIS  THEOLOGICAL  SYSTEM,  IXFLUENCE 
AND  LITERARY  GENIUS. 

Part  II. 

Okrjen  is  the  first  church  writer  who  can  properly  be  called 
a  systematic  theologian.  He  is  not  content  with  grasping  a 
great  central  principle,  he  makes  it  his  task  to  apply  that 
principle  to  the  whole  sphere  of  knowledge.  In  this  respect 
he  shows  an  advance  upon  his  predecessor  Clement.  While 
inferior  to  him  in  insight  and  fearlessness  of  reasoninsr,  he 
addresses  himself  to  a  more  complicated  problem,  and  attains 
a  more  complete  and  many-sided  result. 

His  subject-matter  causes  him  to  l^e  ranked  among  theo- 
logians, but  his  cast  of  mind  is  as  much  philosophical  as 
theological.  In  one  aspect  he  resembles  Justin  and  Irena?us  ; 
in  another  we  must  go  back  to  Plato  and  Aristotle  to  find 
his  parallel. 

The  object  he  set  before  him  was  not  merely  to  attain  a 
correct  apprehension  of  revealed  doctrine,  it  was  to  connect 
that  doctrine  rationally  with  the  sources  of  all  knowledge. 
His  treatise  on  "First  Principles"  (dpxal)  may  be  compared 
with  those  dialogues  of  I*lato  which  establish  grounds  of 
truth,  or  with  the  Metaphysics  of  Aristotle.  It  is  at  least 
as  nearly  related  to  these  works  as  his  other  writiu'^s  are  to 
the  controversial  treatises  of  preceding  Fathers. 

In  criticising  his  theory  of  Christianity  it  is  necessary  to 

bear  this   in    mind.      He  is  sincerely  convinced    that   the 

Christian  Pevelation  has  supplied  the  only  sure  foundations 

of  knowledge.     At  the  same  time,  he  regards  its  data  as  in 

themselves  satisfying  to  the  human  reason,  not  because  they 

are  forcibly  imposed  on  it  from  without,  but  because  they 

480 


ORIGEN.  481 

respond  to  its  inward  demands  in  a  way  that  no  other  prin- 
ciples can. 

To  Origen  the  limits  to  speculation  fixed  by  the  Scripture 
and  the  Church  are  absolute,  and  on  no  account  to  be  trans- 
gressed. But  where  neither  Scripture  nor  the  Church  has 
pronounced,  he  regards  liimself  as  free  to  follow  the  processes 
of  his  own  thought.  To  a  mind  at  once  so  reverent  and  so 
subtle,  so  receptive  and  yet  so  discursive,  it  w^as  inevitable 
that  the  line  he  had  marked  out  for  himself  should  not  always 
be  observed.  He  himself  was  conscious  of  this ;  and  often 
while  indulging  his  speculative  bent  he  expresses  a  hope 
that  he  is  not  travelling  too  far,  and  adds  a  caution  to  the 
reader  not  to  follow  him  without  careful  scrutiny. 

Origen's  theology  reflects  the  twofold  inheritance  of  his 
spirit.  An  Egyptian  Iwrn,  he  moved  instinctively  in  that 
dark  mysterious  borderland  between  thought  and  emotion, 
over  which  hangs  like  a  cloud  the  ever-present  conscious- 
ness of  sin,  broken  here  and  there  by  dazzling  gleams  of 
far-distant  glory.  On  the  other  hand,  the  training  of  Greek 
philosophy  had  predisposed  him  to  seek  for  clear  ideas  and 
a  more  hopeful  vision  of  the  universe  as  seen  in  God.  It  is 
the  convergence  of  these  two  influences  that  makes  him  so 
pre-eminently  interesting.  His  ardent  personality  colours 
all  his  thought.  Even  where  his  reasoning  is  most  abstract, 
the  force  of  suppressed  emotion  lends  a  subtle  heat  to  his 
arguments,  and  while  no  Christian  Father  is  less  directly 
rhetorical,  there  is  not  one  in  whom  the  springs  of  enthu- 
siasm mingle  more  intensely  with  the  broad  current  of 
reasoned  thought.  This  subjective  element  is  at  once  his 
strength  and  his  weakness.  It  has  caused  him  to  wander 
from  the  safe  path  of  permitted  speculation,  and  so  has  hurt 
his  influence;  but  it  has  endeared  him  to  those  who  love 
above  all  things  to  hold  converse  with  a  real  man,  and 
whether  they  accept  or  reject  his  arguments,  to  feel  that  they 
are  the  result  of  genuine  search,  like  hard-won  steps  hewn 
on  the  mountain-side  of  truth. 

The  mass  of  his  writings  is  so  great  and  their  scope  so 
vast  that  we  should  find  it  impossible,  even  if  we  had  the 

2  H 


482  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

requisite  knowledge,  to  criticise  them  in  detail  within  the 
limits  of  this  work.  AVe  j)ropose  to  confine  ourselves  to 
a  general  sumniaiy  of  his  views,  emphasising  those  only 
which  are  most  characteristic  of  the  man.  Our  remarks 
will  be  divided  under  the  four  following  heads — (i)  Exegesis  ; 
(2)  Dogmatic  Theology;  (3)  Apologetics;  (4)  Moral  and 
Ecclesiastical  Views.^ 

1.  Exeg'esis. 

(a.)  Textual  Criticism. 

To  Origen  the  Scriptures  were  in  the  most  pre-eminent 
sense  the  fountain  of  revealed  truth.  No  man  ever  rever- 
enced them  more,  knew  them  better,  strove  more  patiently 

1  The  student  may  be  glad  to  have  presented  to  him  a  list  of  Origen's 
writings.     The  annexed  catalogue  is  borrowed  from  the  excellent  article 
in  Smith's  Biographical  Dictionary.     Those  extant,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
are  printed  in  italics  : — 
Period  i.  Before  his  removal  from  Alexandria. 

The  commencement  of  the  Hexapla. 

First  Commentary  on  the  Canticles  :  perhaps  not  puV)lished. 
A.D.  228-231.  Commentary  {to/jlos)  oh  the  Gospd  o/S.  John  (Bks.  i.-v.). 
Commentaries  on  Psalms  1-25,  on  Genesis  (Bks.  i.-viii.),  on 

Lamentations  and  Exodus  (Bks.  i.  and  ii.). 
Miscellanies  {ZxpupLaTe'is)  in  ten  books. 
On  First  Principles,  four  books. 

On  Praifcr,  on  the  Resurrection  (two  books),  and  on  Free-will. 
The  dates  of  these  are  doubtful,  and  verj- possibly  belong  to 
the  second  period. 
Petiod  2.  After  his  withdrawal  to  Ca?sarea  (a.d,  231-249). 

Commentaries  on  i  Cor.  and  S.  Luke.    Homilies  on  Deut.  and 
.S'.  Lukr. 
A.D.  232-23S.   Commintaries  on  S.  John,  seeoud  series. 
A.D.  235-6.  Letter  to  Gregory.    Commentary  on  Genesis  (Bks. 
ix.-xii.). 
Mystical  Homilies  on  Genesis. 
A.D.  235.   Exhortation  to  Martyrs, 

Homilies  on  Judges  and  on  Isaiah.    Commentaries  on  Isaiali  in 
thirty  books. 
A.D.  23S-240.  Commentaries  on  Ezekiel,  twenty-five  books. 
A.  D.  240.  Letter  to  Julius  Afrieanus  on  the  Greek  additions  to  Daniel. 
Commentaries  on  the  Cantieles,  five  books  written  at  Athens,  the 
remaining  five  at  Casarea, 
A.D.  241.  Homilies  on  Psalms  36-38. 

To  this  period  may  probably  be  assigned  the  Commentaries 


ORIGEN.  483 

to  sound  their  meaning.  His  belief  in  their  Divine  inspira- 
tion is  absolute,  and  extends  to  the  minutest  detail.  His 
Bible  is  of  course  the  LXX,  and  includes  the  Apocryphal 
Books.  The  problem  that  he  set  before  him  was  so  to  inter- 
pret the  entire  body  of  Scripture  that  every  verse  of  it  should 
both  harmonise  with  man's  purest  religious  instinct,  and 
satisfy  the  ideal  of  his  enlightened  reason.  The  first  step 
in  this  task,  for  him  as  for  us,  was  the  establishment  of  a 
correct  text.  To  Origen  belongs  the  glory  of  having  under- 
taken, single-handed  and  with  most  imperfect  appliances, 
the  solution  of  this  gigantic  problem.  That  he  achieved 
comparatively  little  is  not  to  be  wondered  at ;  that  he 
apprehended  the  importance  of  the  subject  is  his  immortal 
title  to  renown. 

He  is  justly  regarded  as  the  Father  of  Biblical  criticism. 
We  cannot  expect  to  find  in  him  a  clear  grasp  of  principles 
which  a  century  of  European  scholarship  has  hardly  yet 
succeeded  in  making  the  religious  world  accept.  But  there 
are  two  salient  points  in  which  he  stands  as  the  pioneer,  and 
strikes  out  the  right  road.  The  first  is  his  assertion  of  the 
superiority  of  the  Hebrew  over  the  LXX  text,  and  his 
recurrence  to  it  as  the  ultimate  resort  in  controversy ;  the 
second  is  his  recognition  of  conflicting  MS.  evidence  for  the 
text  of  the  New  Testament,  and  of  the  need  for  a  careful 
comparison  of  authorities.  These  principles  form  his  con- 
tribution to  the  science  of  textual  criticism.     It  is  true  that 

and  Notes  on  Exodus  and  Leviticus  ;  on  Isaiah  and  the  Minor 
Prophets  ;  Notes  on  Numbers ;  Homilies  on  the  Historical 
Books  ;  completion  of  Commentary  on  the  Psalms. 
After  A.D.  244.  Homilies  taken  down  from  extempore  addresses 
on  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Joshua,  Judges  (?), 
Jeremiah  (?),  and  Ezekiel. 

Commentaries  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  (fifteen  books). 

The  Complete  Ilexapla. 

Commentaries  on  S.  Matthexo. 

Letters  to  Fabianus  and  others.     One  hundred  were  extant  in 
the  time  of  Eusebius.     Commentaries  on  i  Thessalonians  and 
probably  on  Galatians  and  the  other  Pauline  Epistles,  includ- 
ing Hebrews. 
249.  Eight  Books  a^jainst  Celsus. 


484         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

he  could  not  make  much  play  with  them.  For  example,  he 
hy  no  means  appreciates  the  importance  of  tlie  tirst  as  ai)plied 
to  the  (piestion  of  the  A^iocrypha.  Timidity  and  prejudice 
were  here  too  strong.  It  was  Jerome  who  tirst  stated  the  true 
relation  of  those  books  to  the  canonical  Scriptures.  Origen, 
however,  must  not  l)e  jud^^ed  by  his  shortcumings,  l)ut  by 
his  performances.  And  he  who  conceived  and  had  the  per- 
severance to  carry  out  the  plan  of  the  Hexapla  can  be  placed 
only  in  the  first  rank  of  scholars.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say 
that,  if  that  work  had  been  spared  to  us,  many  of  the  vexed 
questions  of  Old  Testament  exegesis  would  have  been  inde- 
finitely simplified.  At  the  same  time,  it  would  be  an  ana- 
chronism to  credit  him  with  the  modern  critical  sense.  Not 
only  was  he  in  this  respect  signally  defective,  but  he  was 
actually  inferior  to  several  of  his  contemporaries.  One  has 
only  to  read  his  correspondence  with  Julius  Africanus  on 
the  authenticity  of  the  History  of  Susanna,  to  see  on  which 
side  the  true  critic's  judgment  lay.  Again,  among  all  his 
observations  on  the  authorship  of  disputed  books,  none  can 
compare  for  acute  appreciation  of  the  evidence  of  style  with 
the  remarks  of  his  pupil  Dionysius  on  the  Apocalypse.  His 
bent  of  mind  was  wholly  idealistic,  and  it  was  only  his  intense 
honesty  of  pur})ose  that  led  him  to  encounter  those  textual 
labours  which  to  us  form  liis  liigliest  praise.  Two  Hashes  of 
genuine  critical  inspiration  tling  a  momentary  light  on  the 
Held  of  his  liiblical  research ;  l)ut  the  light  passes  as  quickly 
as  it  came,  and  leaves  the  tangled  labyrinth  of  his  exegesis 
to  the  twilight  of  groping  erudition  and  will-(if-ilie-wisp 
fancies. 

{k)  System  of  Inteiu'RETAtion. 

If,  liowcvci-,  \v«'  ])ay  an  ungrudging  tribute  to  the  value  of 
his  critical  foundations,  what  are  we  to  say  of  the  pretentious 
editice  of  interpretation  which  he  erected  upon  them  ?  ( )f 
all  the  achievements  of  his  genius,  there  is  none  that  has 
given  rise  to  more  decided  and  yet  more  contradictory  judg- 
ments.    While  one  critic  declares  that  liis  niclhod  discovers 


ORIGEN.  485 

nothing,  but  leaves  the  sense  exactly  where  it  found  it, 
another  ridicules  it  for  the  opposite  capacity  of  proving 
anything  and  everything ;  another  marks  it  with  stern  dis- 
approval as  scientifically  unsound  and  morally  false :  while 
yet  another  extols  it  as  the  pillar  of  Catholic  truth,  and 
claims  that  orthodoxy  and  the  allegorical  method  stand  o 
fall  together. 

That  these  views  cannot  all  be  right  is  obvious.  And  yet 
there  is  a  sense  in  which  one  is  tempted  to  agree  with  each 
of  them.  Viewed  as  a  key  to  the  writer's  original  meaning, 
allegory  must  be  pronounced  a  total  failure;  viewed  as  a 
witness  to  the  infinite  suggestiveness  of  the  Inspired  Word, 
it  still  maintains  its  place,  and  that  a  high  one,  in  Christian 
theology :  but  whenever  and  however  adopted,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  judge  it  in  connection  with  its  historical  conditions, 
and  not  to  credit  it  with  the  attribute  of  scientific  exact- 
ness, as  if  it  was  a  true  system  of  proof. 

Those  sterile  petrifactions  which  too  often  pass  for  allegory 
are  undoubtedly  chargeable  to  Origen's  initiative ;  and  yet 
nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that  in  his  case  the  alle- 
gorical method  was  a  liberal  movement.  For  him  it  was  an 
escape  from  the  bondage  of  the  letter  into  the  freedom  of  the 
spirit.  It  is  the  greatest  mistake  to  regard  it  as  a  machi- 
nery for  enslaving  men's  intelligence.  Never  was  gift  more 
generously  meant  or  more  grievously  misapplied.  Its  true 
counterpart  is  to  be  found  not  in  the  canons  of  an  inflexible 
Rabbinism,  not  in  the  authoritative  current  of  Eoman  Catholic 
interpretation,  but  in  the  Protestant  assertion  of  the  right  of 
private  judgment — yes,  even  in  the  wholly  different  methods 
of  modern  critical  exegesis. 

Let  us  make  this  point  clear.  Two  principles  enter  into 
the  allegorical  method,  one  quasi- scientific,  the  other  indivi- 
dual. Both  are  long  anterior  to  Origen.  The  first  is  trace- 
able to  the  superstitious  belief  that  language  is  in  itself  an 
enigma,  a  sort  of  sacrament  of  thought,  and  that  to  deal 
with  it  successfully  one  must  penetrate  behind  the  veil  to 
the  concealed  mystery.  This  belief  w\as  widely  prevalent  in 
ancient  times.     It  was  pre-eminently  applicable  to  the  poets. 


486         ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Homer  and  Hesiod  were  universally  held  to  be  inspired,  and 
thus  in  a  mure  retlecting  age  their  words  were  made  to  bear 
the  strain  of  a  double  sense.  The  Jewish  philosopher  Philo 
saw  this  principle  at  work  in  Alexandria  and  introduced  it 
into  the  (31d  Testament,  which  stood  above  the  poets  as  in 
sublimity  of  inspiration  so  in  obscurity  of  style.  By  its  un- 
sparing a})plication  he  believed  he  could  discern  the  true 
thoughts  which  lay  hid  behind  riddling  words. 

Then,  besides  the  general  mystery  of  their  language,  there 
were  many  things  in  the  poets  and  no  small  number  in  the 
liible  which  the  enlightened  conscience  found  it  difficult  to 
accept  as  divinely  spoken.  Already  in  the  time  of  Plato 
ingenious  thinkers  were  busy  in  explaining  away  the  offend- 
ing myths.  Plato  himself  was  too  clear-sighted  to  admit  the 
soundness  of  the  process.  Put  the  Stoics  applied  it  with 
unshrinking  consistency  to  the  entire  corjms  of  mythology, 
which  they  contrived  to  expound  in  the  sense  of  their  own 
philosophical  system  with  an  ingenuity  which,  if  not  con- 
vincing, was  at  least  persuasive,  as  based  on  a  method  to  all 
appearance  scientific.  Philo  seized  on  this  method  with 
eager  satisfaction,  as  enabling  him  at  once  to  retain  his 
l)hilosophical  beliefs  and  yet  to  vindicate  for  the  Old  Testa- 
ment that  plenary  inspiration  which  his  Jewish  training 
demanded.  He  is  the  true  father  of  Christian  allegory.  So 
far  as  Origen's  method  can  be  called  scientific,  or  rather 
pseudo-scientitic,  it  is  but  an  extension  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment of  the  method  of  Philo,  only  reading  a  Christian  sense 
into  that  in  which  Philo  had  been  content  to  find  a  Jewish 
one.  Tlie  I'latonic  idealism  with  which  both  Philo  and 
Origen  were  deeply  imbued  made  this  course  the  easier, 
because  it  enabled  them  to  regard  the  literal  sense  as  merely 
a  copy  or  adunilnation  of  the  spiritual,  which  was  the  true 
and  only  priniaiy  sense. 

But  over  and  above  this  systematic  recasting  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  in  the  form  of  a  spiritualistic  philosophy,  we  can 
discern  another  element  of  a  freer  and  more  individual  char- 
acter. This  also  is  traceable  to  a  heathen  source.  The 
student  of  Plato  and  Aristotle   will  remember  that,  after 


ORIGEN.  487 

arriving  at  some  result  by  a  purely  logical  process,  they  often 
clench  their  argument  by  appropriate  quotations  from 
Homer,  which  they  adduce  not  exactly  as  proofs,  but  as 
significant  corroborations,  which  suggest  that  what  the 
thinker  has  demonstrated,  tlie  poet  had  under  divine  afflatus 
anticipated.  The  limits  to  this  class  of  illustration  are  only 
fixed  by  the  ingenuity  of  the  illustrator.  Any  philosophic 
conclusion,  physical,  moral,  or  spiritual,  could  with  a  little 
forcing  be  found  already  implicit  in  the  poets.  We  can 
easily  see  how  important  such  an  instrument  as  this  would 
be  to  a  Christian  writer  who  desired  to  preserve  his  rever- 
ence for  the  inspired  Word,  while  equally  determined  not  to 
surrender  the  independent  conclusions  of  his  thought.  It 
was  the  Gnostics  who  first  exemplified  both  the  power  and 
the  danger  of  thus  using  Scripture.  Trained  in  heathen 
schools,  they  exhibit  equal  originality  in  forcing  Greek 
poetry  and  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  into  the  witness- 
box  as  corroborative  evidence  of  their  hybrid  theories.^  And 
it  was  in  opposition  to  their  daring  and  illegitimate  applica- 
tions of  Scripture  that  Origen  sought  to  exemplify  the  true 
use  of  Scripture  illustration  without,  as  he  believed,  doing 
violence  to  its  genuine  import. 

In  order,  therefore,  to  understand  the  allegorism  of  Origen 
we  must  consider  that  he  had  before  him  two  classes  of 
interpretation,  against  which  he  thought  it  needful  to  con- 
tend as  destructive  on  the  one  hand  of  Christian  spirituality, 
and  on  the  other  of  the  holiness  of  Scripture.  His  theory  of 
the  mystical  sense  was  a  protest  against  the  carnal  literalism 
of  the  Jewish  Christian  ;  his  theory  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  aid  to 
the  rational  inquirer  was  a  protest  against  the  indiscriminate 
laxity  of  the  Gnostic.  In  both  aspects,  it  was  a  decided 
step  in  advance  ;  a  blow  struck  for  freedom  as  against  bond- 
age, for  rule  as  against  lawlessness.  The  immense  influence 
of  his  name  has  unhappily  perpetuated  that  which  was  in 

^  The  reader  is  referred  to  the  Philosophumcna  of  Hii)polytus,  where  ex- 
cerpts from  Gnostic  writings  are  given,  emphasising  their  views  now  by  a 
quotation  from  Homer  or  Sophocles,  now  by  a  reference  to  the  Gospels  or 
Tauline  Epistles. 


488  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

its  nature  traii.siLiuiical,  and  crystallised  what  was  lluid. 
Fixed  in  dogmatic  fetters,  and  canonised  l^y  blind  tradition, 
allegorism  has  been  vaunted  as  the  bulwark  of  orthodoxy, 
and  its  rejection  stigmatised  as  heretical.  In  this  way 
Origen  has  sulFered  great  injustice.  No  man  was  ever  less 
dogmatically  minded.  Again  and  again  he  protests  that  he 
wishes  to  bind  no  man's  conscience.  It  is  true  he  himself 
is  convinced  that  he  holds  the  key  of  Scripture.  And  some- 
times he  allows  himself  to  speak  of  his  method  as  the 
privilege  of  the  higher  mind,  as  a  secret  esoteric  wisdom 
hidden  from  the  rank  and  file  of  believers.  But  a  just 
criticism  will  regard  his  entire  attitude  towards  the  faith, 
and  not  be  led  by  the  course  of  subsequent  developments  to 
ascribe  to  him  an  intention  which  was  far  from  him.  It  is 
the  unconscious  tribute  of  posterity  to  his  unrivalled  great- 
ness tliat  in  a  cliurch  full  of  impassioned  hostility  to  his  name, 
the  most  erroneous  because  the  most  easily  grasped  features 
of  his  interpretation  were  just  those  which  survived,  while 
the  great  underlying  principle  was  utterly  misunderstood, 
and,  even  had  it  been  understood,  would  have  been  indig- 
nantly repudiated. 

It  is  now  time  to  come  to  the  details  of  his  method.  In 
accordance  with  man's  threefold  nature  as  described  by  b. 
Paul,  viz.,  body,  soul,  and  spirit,^  he  lays  down  that  there  is 
a  threefold  sense  in  Scripture — the  literal,  corresponding  to 
the  botly  ;  the  moral,  corresponding  to  the  soul ;  and  the  mys- 
tical, corresponding  to  the  spirit.-  He  accepted  in  its  com- 
jjleteness  the  current  theory  of  Scripture  inspiration,  quoting 
our  Lord's  words  as  evidence  of  the  equal  sanctity  of  all  its 

'  crii^a,  ^I'X^J,  Tuev/jLa,  corresponding  to  tlic  flcslily  nppctitcs,  the  moral 
and  intelligent  principle,  and  the  spiritual  part,  wliiih  alone  can  receive 
divine  truth,  and  i.s  it.self,  j)erhaj»s,  an  elllux  of  the  Divine  Nature.  Some 
liavc  thought  he  had  in  mind  also  the  Platonic  division  of  the  soul  into  t6 
iiTidvfirjTtKbv,  t6  OvfxoftS^s,  and  t6  XoytffTiKdf.    lUit  this  is  not  likely. 

-  This  last  has  again  heen  subdivided  into  the  analogical,  troj)ological, 
and  anagogical,  corresj)onding  to  the  individual  t/tid  individual,  to  the 
individual  ijud  memher  of  the  Church  on  earth,  and  to  the  individual  «jud 
member  of  the  Chun^h  of  the  firstborn  in  heaven.  But  it  is  very  doubtful 
whether  Ori-«n  is  to  bt;  credited  with  this  refinement. 


ORIGEN.  489 

parts.  In  order  to  hold  this  view,  it  is  not  necessary  that 
every  passage  of  the  Bible  should  be  susceptible  of  all  three 
interpretations.  Some  are  plainly  literal  and  literal  only  ; 
others  as  plainly  moral,  others  only  spiritual.  But  in  the 
case  of  others  again,  where  the  literal  sense  is  impossible  or 
immoral,  Origen  distinctly  declared  that  that  sense  must  be 
abandoned.  He  instances  the  description  of  nights  and  days 
existing  before  the  sun,  of  the  devil  showing  Jesus  all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  earth  at  one  glance,  and  many  others.  In 
all  such  cases  the  letter  is  not  only  insufficient ;  it  is  untrue. 
Again,  where  the  literal  history  is  not  absolutely  impossible, 
but  either  improbable  or  unedifying,  he  sacrifices  it  without 
hesitation.  The  narrative  of  Adam's  creation  and  fall,  the  sin 
of  Tamar,  and  many  such  stories,  are  to  him  evident  instances 
of  allegory,  in  which  a  literal  interpretation  would  deprive 
us  of  the  divine  lesson  which  the  Spirit  intended  to  convey. 
He  even  adopts  the  curious  theory  that  many  details  are 
falsely  recorded  as  facts  for  the  express  purpose  of  arousing 
the  spiritual  intelligence,  and  goading  it  to  leap  over  the 
stumblingblock  of  the  letter  and  reach  to  the  goal  of  the 
spirit.  Often  he  imagines  obstacles  where  the  uninitiated 
rightly  fails  to  perceive  them.  Thus  the  upper  and  nether 
springs  given  to  Caleb's  daughter  are  to  him  symbols  of  ^: 
inscrutable  mysteries.  In  this  we  see  plainly  the  harmful 
influence  of  Plato's  idealism.  The  phenomenal  vanishes 
under  contemplation ;  the  invisible  essence  shapes  itself 
before  his  gaze.  At  the  same  time,  he  is  careful  to  explain 
that  the  foundation  of  all  exegesis  is  the  literal  meaning. 
It  is  indispensable  to  understand  this  first ;  otherwise  the 
spiritual  superstructure  will  be  built  on  sand.  But  he  asserts 
no  less  emphatically  that  the  most  complete  elucidation  of 
the  primary  meaning  is  wholly  insufficient  for  exegesis.  He 
would  have  utterly  repudiated  the  view,  that  when  we  have 
ascertained  what  was  in  the  mind  of  the  writer  at  the  time 
he  wrote,  we  have  learnt  all  that  is  to  be  known.  He  will  not 
indeed  go  so  far  as  to  say  nothing  is  only  literal,  but  he  most 
decidedly  says  that  all  is  spiritual.  His  overpowering  sense  of 
the  Divine  Goodness  and  of  human  freedom  will  not  permit 


490         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

him  to  interpret  in  their  obvious  sense  commands  that  seem 
to  him  immoral,  such  as  the  extermination  of  the  Canaanites, 
the  imprecations  of  the  Psalms,  the  inclusion  of  the  innocent 
with  the  guilty.  In  all  the.se  he  declares  the  moral  interpre- 
tation nmst  vanish  with  the  literal,  and  the  mystical  alone  be 
accepted.  Most  es})ecially  does  he  reject  all  those  assertions 
which  imply  tliat  God  is  the  author  of  moral  evil,  as  when 
He  is  said  to  have  hardened  Pharaoh's  heart,  to  have  pre- 
pared the  wicked  for  the  day  of  evil,  or  to  have  predestined 
some  to  life  and  others  to  death.  His  explanations  of  these 
texts  may  not  indeed  satisfy  the  highest  modern  spiritual 
requirements,  but  they  are  most  earnest  and  thorough,  and 
cannot  be  read  without  an  irresistible  sympathy  for  the  mind 
that  saw  the  difficulty  and  did  not  shrink  from  honestly 
grappling  with  it.  Space  forbids  our  dilating  on  this  attrac- 
tive theme.  We  can  but  refer  the  reader  to  those  numerous 
works  in  which  the  subject  is  dealt  with,  and  specially  to 
(^rigen's  own  commentaries  on  Genesis  and  Romans,  and  to 
the  fourth  book  of  the  !4/?;^at,  where  the  general  outlines  of 
the  (jurstioii  are  clearly  and  fully  set  forth. 

The  following'  propositions  are  an  attempt  to  summarise 
the  attitude  of  Origen  to  Scripture  Exegesis: — i.  The  Scri])- 
tures  are  the  source  of  Divine  Truth.  2.  Consequently, 
on  their  correct  interpretation  depends  eternal  life,  which 
Christ  declares  to  consist  in  the  knowledge  of  God.  3.  Those 
points  which  are  absolutely  necessary  for  salvation  have 
been  gathered  from  Scripture  and  formulated  by  the  Church 
in  her  sym])ols.  These  symbols  bind  not  only  the  ordinary 
('hristian,  but  the  philosopher.  Origen  never  questions 
them.  4.  All  other  points  are  left  open  to  the  ability  of  the 
interpreter.  But  his  freedom  is  not  unlimited.  It  is  con- 
ditioned on  the  one  hand  by  the  soundness  of  his  method, 
and  on  the  other  by  the  great  principles  of  God's  goodness 
and  man's  freewill,  which  underlie  all  revelation.  5.  A  sound 
method  is  secured  lirst  by  a  thorough  study  of  the  processes 
of  the  trained  intelligence,  and  then  by  direct  prayer  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  make  that  study  fruitful.  6.  To  Origen,  fol- 
lowing the  greatest  minds  of  his  day,  the  method  of  allegory, 


ORIGEN.  491 

starting  from  a  correctly  established  text,  approved  itself  as 
imr  excellence  the  scientific  method. 

It  follows  from  these  considerations  that  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture  was  for  Origen  the  beginning  and  end  of 
theology.  Had  his  mind  been  of  a  more  robust  order,  he 
might  have  laid  down  principles  of  more  enduring  value. 
But  let  it  be  repeated,  his  attempt,  with  all  its  imperfect 
success,  is  worthy  of  honour.  Its  shortcomings  were  partly 
rectified  by  the  literalist  school  of  Antioch,  which  is  the 
direct  though  remote  precursor  of  modern  exegesis.  But  so 
long  as  Christians  recognise  in  the  Bible  a  more  than  human 
inspiration,  the  mystic  interpretation  can  never  be  out  of 
date,  and  Orig^en's  labours  can  never  die. 


2.  His  Doctrinal  System. 

Origen  was  the  first  to  systematise  the  whole  body  of 
Christian  knowledge.  Here  again  he  resembles  Aristotle. 
Previous  theologians  had  been  content  to  bring  forward 
important  aspects  of  Christianity.  Even  those  who,  like 
Tertullian,  had  traversed  nearly  the  whole  field,  had  not 
reduced  it  to  an  orderly  system.  Origen  reared  a  vast  fabric 
of  dogmatic  theology,  though  in  a  philosophic,  not  in  a  dog- 
matic spirit.  It  was  because  the  root-principles  of  Christi- 
anity seemed  to  him  to  be  self-evident,  not  because  they 
were  given  on  authority,  that  he  based  his  structure  of  belief 
upon  them.  In  this  respect  he  differs  completely  from 
IreUcTus  and  Tertullian.  These  great  writers  start  from 
authority,  and  bring  all  opinions,  their  own  included,  to  its 
supreme  test.  And  their  authority  is  virtually,  though  not 
admittedly,  that  of  the  Eoman  Church.  To  Origen  the  ulti- 
mate ground  of  authority  is  the  self-revealing  Word  expres- 
sing Himself  in  humanity,  in  the  individual  conscience,  in 
Scripture,  and  m  the  Church.  The  outlines  of  his  theory 
are  given  in  the  four  books  of  ap-)(aX,  or  First  Principles, 
published  at  Alexandria  when  he  was  about  forty  years  of 
age,  and  held  by  him  without  material  modification  till  the 
end  of  his  life.     They  are  collected  also  from  his  other  works. 


492  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

We  shall  eiulL'jivour  to  present  them  to  our  readers  as  briefly 
and  clearly  as  we  can,  remarking  that  since  many  inconsistent 
views  were  advanced  by  him  from  time  to  time,  we  cannot 
pretend  to  do  more  than  indicate  what  we  conceive  to  be  the 
main  drift  of  his  system. 

His  theology,  then,  is  an  ontology,  an  explanation  of  the 
Universe.  He  will  not  be  content  with  any  solution  less  all- 
embracing  than  that  which  his  heathen  contemporaries,  the 
Neo-Platonists,  were  attempting.  He  sets  himself  to  explain 
the  entire  problem  of  ])eing.  This  is  at  once  the  secret 
of  his  fascination  and  of  his  weakness.  The  Gnostic  and 
the  l^antheist  had  taken  necessity  as  their  starting-point ; 
Origen's  key  of  the  Universe  is  Freedom.^ 


(a.)  The  Deity. 

God  is  the  One  Al)Solute  Being,  not  supra-cosmic  only, 
but  transcendental,-  the  Self -existent  and  Self-sufficing 
Monad,  who  alone  contemplates  Himself  in  unchanging  per- 
fection ;  called  in  Scripture  the  Father.  Even  the  Logos  does 
not  contemplate  the  Father  as  the  Father  contemplates  Him- 
self. The  Son  and  Spirit  are  not  necessary  to  the  Father  so  far 
as  He  is  Absolute  God,  but  only  so  far  as  He  is  Love,  Father, 
Creator.  Tliis  is  Origen's  l^latonic  taint.  God  is  abso- 
lutely unchangeable.  All  expressions  which  imply  change  or 
movement  on  His  part  are  accommodations.  He  is  indeed 
Love;  but  to  Origen  His  Love  is  rather  His  inseparable 
attribute  •*  than  His  essence.  The  manifestation  of  His  Love 
is  necessarily  eternal.  As  Father,  He  must  from  all  eternity 
have  a  Son  to  love ;  as  AlmigliLy,  He  nmst  from  all  eternity 
have  a  Universe  to  govern.  It  is  necessary  to  His  immuta- 
bility that  the  creative  idea  and  the  creative  fact  should  both 
l)e  without  beginning.      Tliis  view  at  first  sight  resembles 


'  Tlie  treultnent  of  tliis  sectifin  is  founded  on  tliat  of  Dr.  I'rcsscnst^,  in 
his  History  of  the  Christian  Church. 

-  VuT  the  importance  of  tliis  distinit  ion  the  reader  is  referred  to  Hatch's 
ninth  Hibbert  Lecture. 

•*  Or  proprium.     iSluna. 


ORIGEN.  493 

that  of  Philo,  viz.,  that  the  Word  is  an  impersonal  Idea,  an 
archetypal  Thought  of  Creation  not  truly  distinct  from  it. 
But  Origen  goes  beyond  Philo  in  that  he  does  not  confound 
the  Word  with  Creation.  The  Word  is  not  merely  recep- 
tive of  the  Divine  Idioinata  (Perfections),  He  is  the  idiomata. 
The  sole  intelligible  distinction  between  the  Word  and  the 
Father  is  that  the  self-consciousness  of  the  Father  is  prim- 
ordial, that  of  the  Word  derivative.  Thus  the  Father  alone 
is  avTodeoq,  6  6€6<;,  God  absolutely ;  the  Son  is  6e6^,  God,  and 
even  Sevrepo^;  Oeo^,  a  second  God.  His  derivativeness  renders 
Him  capable  of  change,  and  so  makes  His  Incarnation  pos- 
sible, but  it  does  not  affect  His  essential  Divinity.  Origen 
expressly  states  Him  to  be  of  one  substance  with  the  Father.^ 
The  relation  of  the  Father  to  the  Word  is  like  that  of  thought 
to  will,  not  of  will  to  act.  The  Son  is  nearer  to  the  Father 
than  to  creation,  of  which  He  is  Himself  the  fountain  (apxv) 
as  well  as  the  architect  (STjfjLLovpyo^).  At  the  same  time  He 
is  subordinate  to  the  Father  in  respect  of  His  Deity  as 
well  as  in  respect  of  His  humanity — a  feature  in  Origen's 
system  from  which  inferences  were,  perhaps  unfairly,  drawn 
unfavourable  to  his  orthodoxy. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not  treated  by  Origen 
with  much  fulness.  He  seems  to  regard  Him  as  derived 
from  the  Son,  and  calls  Him  the  firstborn  of  creatures.  He 
is  the  impersonation  of  the  idea  of  holiness,  as  the  Word 

^  6/xoov(XLos.  So  Pamphilus  asserts.  The  following-  remarks  from  Hatch's 
Hibbert  Lectures,  ix.  p.  266,  are  worth  inserting  :— "  The  generation  "  (of 
the  Son)  "  had  taken  place  within  the  sphere  of  Deity  itself  ;  not  by  the 
severing  of  a  part  from  the  whole,  as  though  the  Divine  Nature  admitted 
of  division,  but  by  distinction  of  function  or  by  multiplication,  as  many 
torches  may  be  lit  from  one  without  diminishing  the  light  of  that  one." 
This  metaphor  is  practically  though  not  professedly  accepted  by  Origen. 
But  in  his  case  it  has  to  be  supplemented  by  the  eternity  of  the  Son's 
generation.  "  Light  could  never  have  been  without  its  capacity  to  shine. 
The  Supreme  Mind  could  never  have  been  without  His  Thought."  Origen's 
view  is  clear  and  precise,  but  not  always  consistently  kept  to.  "  He  hovers 
between  the  Logos  as  thought  and  as  substance."  His  doctrine  is  developed 
from  the  cruder  forms  of  it  which  we  trace  in  Justin,  Theophilus,  and 
Tatian,  and  which  arc  gathered  together  in  Clement,  It  also  gains  clear- 
ness from  antagonism  to  the  Noetian  errors  which  were  current  in  Rome 
during  the  time  of  Origen's  sojourn  there. 


494         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

is  of  reason.  The  Word  rules  all  rational  beings,  the  Spirit 
only  the  saints.  In  the  ultimate  analysis,  the  Father  is  the 
sole  source  of  Godhead. 

It  will  be  seen  that  Origen  is  far  from  holding  the  firm 
ground  of  Athanasius.  His  views  are  not  wholly  purged 
of  the  CJnostic  leaven.  In  spite  of  his  placing  the  Divine 
freedom  in  the  foreground,  he  unconsciously  limits  it  by 
asserting  the  necessity  of  an  eternal  creation.  In  spite  of 
his  submission  to  the  Church's  creed,  his  account  of  the 
generation  of  the  Word  is  not  wholly  clear  of  Philonism. 
Hence,  when  in  after  days  the  Arian  controversy  raged, 
there  were  not  wanting  heretics  who  claimed  him  for  their 
side.  Athanasius,  however,  with  truer  discernment,  declared 
him  orthodox  on  the  vital  point,  his  enunciation  of  the 
"  eternal  generation"  and  the  " consubstantiality  "  of  the  Son 
being  rightly  regarded  as  contributions  to  the  faith  which 
no  weakness  of  logic  could  impair. 

{!).)  Creation— The  Soul. 

Creation  is  regarded  by  Origen  rather  as  a  divine  activity 
than  as  a  concrete  product.  It  would  hardly  be  untrue  to 
say  that  this  visible  world  is  scarcely  by  him  regarded  as 
creation,  but  as  a  copy  or  duplicate  of  it.  The  original 
creation,  which  proceeds  directly  from  the  Logos,  exists  as 
iJivine  idea  before  it  is  drawn  into  actuality.  Hence  it  is 
wholly  good,  for  evil  is  an  accident,  a  negation,  which  cannot 
be  thought,  far  less  engendered,  by  God.  Hence  also  it  is 
spiritual  creation,  partaking  of  the  eternal  Reason,  and  of 
the  same  nature  as  that  Heason.  But  created  spirits  do  not 
possess  the  good  by  essence,  but  only  by  free  moral  determina- 
tions. Every  rational  creature  therefore  is  susceptible  of  good 
and  evil,  and  its  destiny  depends,  not  on  its  original  condi- 
tion, but  on  its  merit.  The  quantity  of  created  existence  is 
definite,  and  its  quality  uniform.^    The   one  only  dillerence 

*  This  is  a  relic  of  Greek  philosophy,  to  which  the  infinite  is  synonymous 
with  the  undetermined,  that  which  is  irreducible  to  order,  and  therefore 
not  to  be  associated  with  the  Divine  perfection,  which  is  essentially 
orderly,  and  so  finite  (ir(ir(paan(i'ov). 


ORIGEN.  495 

between  souls  is  in  the  degree  of  their  moral  steadfastness. 
All  are  supposed  capable  of  lapse,  but  all  have  not  lapsed. 
The   several   degrees   of   lapse   express   themselves   in    the 
material  surroundings  or  worlds.     Matter  is  the  concomitant 
and  envelope  of  spirit.     It  is  God's  creation,  and  is  not  as 
such  evil.     But  we  must  be  careful  not  to  confound  matter 
in  its  original  purity  with  the  gross  matter  which  we  see 
around  us.     Matter  is  essentially  light,  plastic,  and  susceptible 
of  infinite  changes,  each  exactly  corresponding  to  the  moral 
state  of  the  spirits  who  are  associated  with  it.     Our  present 
world  is  the  net  result  of  an  antecedent  moral  history.     It  is 
to  be  considered  as  a  place  of  reparation  and  chastisement, 
suited  to  the  fallen  souls  who  alone  inhabit  it,  and  in  the 
course  of  whose  discipline  it  is  a  temporary  stage.     But  for 
higher  and  purer  spirits  matter  volatilises  itself,  so  to  speak : 
it  becomes   subtle,  ethereal   or   luminous,   wholly  different 
from   this   "muddy  vesture   of   decay."     The  hierarchy  of 
spiritual   natures   is   not   fixed   in    character :  it  admits  of 
transmutation  from  the  angelic  to  the  human  or  the  demonic, 
according  to  the  varying  scale  of  moral  determinations.     The 
Divine  Love  and  Justice,  which  are  in  truth  one,  preside  over 
this  ceaseless  ascent   and  descent  of   souls,  the   only   and 
sufiicient  purpose  of   which  is  moral  purification.     Origen, 
however,  confines  the  sphere  of  this  process  to  rational  souls, 
and  strongly  denies  any  transmigration  into  irrational  natures. 
At  the  summit  of  the  spiritual  creation  stand  those  who 
have  declined  least,  the  angelic  natures,  among  which  he 
inclines  to  include  the  stars.       At  its  base  stand  the  evil 
spirits ;  but  even  for  them  recovery  is,  at  least  in  theory, 
possible.     Intermediate  between  these  two  classes  is  man, 
in  whom  the  Word  sleeps,  as  Jesus  slept  in  the  boat  on  the 
lake.     Man  is  responsible  for  the  introduction  of  evil  into 
this  mundane  sphere.     He  might  have  triumphed  over  it, 
but  has  failed  to  do  so.    Hence  the  Prince  of  Evil  has  fearful 
power  over  him.     He  and  all  the  mundane  creation  with 
him  are  lost  if  not  succoured.     This  suggests  the  plan  of 
iJivine  Redemption,  which  was  effected  through  the  Incarna- 
tion of  the  Word. 


496  ALKXANDRIAX   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 


(r.)    IlKDHMlTION. 

We  have  now  iinived  at  the  most  oiij^inal  but  at  the  same 
lime  the  most  objectionable  feature  in  Origen's  theolog)'. 
In  order  to  account  for  the  Eternal  Word  coming  into  con- 
tact with  the  gross  matter  of  this  earthly  sphere,  he  suggests 
the  following  theory. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Origen  asserts  freewill  both 
of  (Jod  and  of  created  natures.  But  there  is  a  difference 
in  their  freedom.  God  possesses  the  good  by  essence,  and 
cannot  lose  it.  His  liberty,  therefore,  is  something  higher 
than  free  choice  ^ — a  sort  of  self-approving  or  self-rellecting 
uniformity.  Created  spirits,  on  the  other  hand,  possess  the 
good  by  choice  only,  and  can  lose  it  by  choice.  But  if  we 
can  suppose  a  created  soul  to  have  chosen  the  good  unde^  i- 
atingly  from  the  first,  through  pure  love  of  it  and  from  no 
other  motive,  then  such  choice  has  a  tendency  to  become 
permanent  and  indefectible,  so  that  it  may  at  length  be 
treated  as  a  ]tart  of  that  soul's  nature,  and  the  soul  itself 
be  placed  above  the  possibility  of  lapse,  even  as  a  bar  of 
iron  in  an  ever-burning  tire,  though  still  in  substance  iron, 
loses  all  its  attributes,  and  assumes  those  of  fire,  so  that  we 
cannot  conceive  of  it  while  so  circumstanced  as  admitting 
the  possibility  of  cold.  Now  Origen  holds  that  such  a 
rational  human  soul  existed  and  took  a  body,  and  that  it  was 
that  soul  and  that  l)ody  to  which  the  Eternal  AVoid  united 
Himself.  In  tliis  way  the  hi/jwslalic  union  is  explained,  and 
the  problem  of  contact  of  Deity  witli  matter  solved  without 
prejudice  to  Its  purity.  At  the  same  time,  the  matter  of 
.Fesus  Christ's  Body  cannot  be  regarded  as  precisely  similar 
to  that  of  ours.  Even  in  His  liumiliation  there  were  signs 
of  other  (jualities  tlian  those  with  which  we  are  familiar,  as 
is  evident  to  the  attentive   reader  of  the  (Jospels.     Origen 

*  Origen  seetu.s  to  have  held  nut  ouly  that  God  cannot  tlo  evil,  which 

all  Thei.sts  hold,  but  also  that  Hr  cannot  abstain  from  doing  good  ;  or,  to 

put  it  in  a  familiar  form,  not  only  can  He  not  do  what  He  ought  not 

I    to  do,  but  He  cannot  leave  undone  what  He  ought  to  do.     The  obnous 

tendency  of  this  thought  is  optimi.sm,  a  thoroughgoing  Th<5ociic<5c. 


ORIGEN.  497 

even  held  that  the  impression  made  by  Christ's  Body  upon 
the  senses  varied  according  to  the  degree  of  the  beholder's 
spiritual  insight.  To  the  Scribes  He  appeared  mean  and  ugly, 
to  the  believer  strong  and  majestic;  to  John  the  Baptist 
and  the  Apostles  in  their  higher  moments  His  form  was 
disclosed  in  its  superliuman  lineaments.^ 

The  sacrifice  of  Christ's  death  was  offered  for  the  whole 
rational  creation,  for  angels  and  demons,  for  the  dead  as 
well  as  the  living.  To  angels  He  became  an  angel,  to  men 
a  man.  The  bloody  scene  of  Calvary  was  paralleled  by  a 
celestial  sacrifice,  in  which  Christ  offered  the  pure  essence 
of  His  moral  will  to  God.  How  far  Origen  admitted  a  suc- 
cession of  incarnations  in  different  modes  of  being  is  uncer- 
tain, but  it  seems  impossible  to  harmonise  his  beautiful  and 
poetic  theory  with  the  dogma  of  the  One  Sacrifice  once 
offered,  and  the  eternal  retention  by  the  Son  of  God  of  His 
glorified  manhood.  The  Church  therefore  had  no  option  but 
to  condemn  it  as  unorthodox. 

We  now  proceed  to  inquire  what  effect  Christ's  redemp- 
tion had  upon  mankind.  Following  Clement,  Origen  regards 
it  first  as  an  illumination  (^wrto-yuo?),  to  reveal  to  us  the 
saving  truth,  and  secondly,  as  a  deliverance  from  sin  and  its 
consequent  punishment,  but  not  as  a  judicial  expiation.  To 
him  punishment  is  purely  remedial  and  corrective,  in  no 
sense  retributive.  Its  sole  end  is  the  eradication  of  moral 
evil.  The  eternal  Son  offered  Himself  to  God's  love  as 
taking  away  the  sin  of  the  world,  not  to  God's  justice,  as 
bearing  the  penalty  which  guilty  sinners  must  otherwise 
have  endured.'-'     The  two  great  features  in  later  theories  of 

1  We  easily  observe  how  strong  was  the  influence  of  Plato  upon  the 
Christian  theologian.  The  idea  of  the  purified  senses  seeing  the  true  out- 
lines of  a  deity  is  made  familiar  to  every  scholar  through  the  exquisite 
verse  of  Virgil,  ^n.  ii.  590 : — 

"  Cum  mihi  se,  non  ante  oculis  tarn  clara,  vidcndam 
Obtulit  et  pura  per  noctem  in  luce  rcfulsit 
Alma  parens,  confessa  deam,  qualisquo  videri 
Caelicolis  et  quanta  solct." 

2  Origen  seems  to  have  held  that  a  ransom  was  paid  to  Satan,  who  had 
acquired  certain  rights  over  mankind  through  man's  yielding  to  his  influ- 

2   I 


498  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

the  Atuiieiueiit,  viz.  (i)  that  Christ  appeased  God's  wrath, 
and  (2)  tliat  the  suHerings  of  Deity  alone  could  outweigh  the 
infinite  sins  of  men,  are  not  only  absent  from  liis  system,  but 
wholly  repugnant  to  it. 

3.  His  Apologetic  Theory. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  M.  Aurelius,  about  A.D. 
1 7 8,  a  friend  of  Lucian's  named  Celsus  had  written  a  treatise 
against  the  Christians  calk'd  'A\7]di]<^  X070?  (a  True  Word). 
Some  fifty  years  later  this  work  fell  into  the  hands  of  Am- 
brosius,  who  sent  it  to  Origen,  with  a  request  that  he  would 
answer  it.  Origen  was  disinclined  at  first  to  comply,  think- 
ing it  better  to  be  silent  under  misrepresentation,  as  Christ 
was  silent  before  Pilate ;  but,  having  studied  the  argument 
and  being  impressed  with  its  importance,  he  resolved  to 
refute  it.  He  devoted  about  two  years  to  this  task,  which 
he  has  executed  with  thoroughness  and  candour,  though 
not  without  signs  of  haste.  His  method  is  unsystematic 
and  hard  to  follow ;  but  he  deserves  our  thanks  for  quoting 
the  gix'ater  part  of  Celsus'  treatise  in  his  own  words,  and  so 
enabling  us  to  judge  of  its  value. 

It  will  l»e  necessary  to  give  a  brief  summary  of  Celsus' 
position  before  approaching  that  of  Origen. 

It  appears  that  Origen  knew  Celsus  by  reputation  as  the 
friend  of  Lucian,  and  therefore  presumably  an  Epicurean,  in 
other  words,  an  Atheist.  He  took  up  the  book  prepared  to 
find  it  built  on  Epicurean  principles,  and  was  astonished  to 
find  it  instead  strongly  imbued  with  Platonism.  He  recon- 
ciled this  contUcting  evidence  by  the  theory  that  Celsus  was 
really  an  Epicurean,  but  not  wishing  his  book  to  be  set  aside 
as  godless,  disguised  his  unpopular  convictions  and  assumed 
the  garb  of  a  riatonist.  This  ingenious  supposition  is  quite 
needless.     So   far  as  Celsus  is  a  philosoplier  at  all,  he   is 

cncc.  The  ransom  was  Christ's  Blood,  pcrlmps  also  His  human  soul,  which 
Satan  endeavoured  to  detain  in  Hades,  but  with  as  little  success  as  the 
IMiilistines  strove  to  keep  the  ark  of  God.  This  view  of  Christ's  atone- 
ment accounts  for  a  stranire  feature  in  Origcn's  belief,  viz.,  that  a  true 
liuman  martyrdom  has  also  a  certain  atoning  value,  and  for  this  reason  is 
8{)ecially  hateful  to  the  devil. 


ORIGEN.  499 

clearly  a  Platonist.  But  his  philosophy  does  not  go  very 
deep.  He  poses  rather  as  the  acute,  sensible,  cultivated  man 
of  the  world  who  admits  the  need  of  a  reasonable  religious 
belief,  and  is  not  without  moral  convictions.  He  is  a  fair 
specimen  of  the  more  thoughtful  opponents  of  the  new  faith,; 
as  Caecilius  in  the  Octavius  is  of  the  average  man  of  society .^ 
He  had  read  widely  if  not  profoundly :  he  had  some  acquaint- 
ance with  both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  was  not 
intentionally  unjust.  He  has  the  gift  of  skilful  and  telling- 
exposition,  and  altogether  is  by  far  the  strongest  antagonist 
of  Christianity,  though  the  Church  awarded  that  distinction 
to  Porphyry  on  account  of  his  minuter  technical  knowledge. 
But  Celsus  fights  the  battle  on  the  broad  ground  of  the 
whole  relation  of  the  Church  to  the  world,  and  with  a  force 
and  clearness  that  leave  little  to  be  desired.  He  is  an  oppo- 
nent worthy  of  Origen's  steel ;  and  no  other  Christian  Father 
could  have  so  successfully  dealt  with  him. 

With  signal  adroitness,  Celsus  takes  advantage  of  the 
quarrel  between  Christianity  and  Judaism  to  turn  the  two 
creeds  against  each  other,  and  to  fix  on  both  the  same  brand 
of  mere  party-spirit.  The  Jews  were  a  factious  band  of 
Egyptian  slaves,  who  set  themselves  up  against  the  whole 
world ;  and  the  Christians  are  a  still  more  factious  offshoot 
of  that  factious  stock.  On  the  principle  of  "  Set  a  thief  to 
catch  a  thief,"  he  thinks  the  most  fitting  character  in  which 
to  commence  his  attack  is  that  of  an  orthodox  Jew. 

He  divides  his  polemic  into  two  parts ;  the  first  in  which 
he  speaks  as  a  Jew,  the  second  in  which  he  speaks  in  his 
own  person.  It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  any  details 
as  to  the  former.  Though  acutely  urged,  the  argument 
passed  over  well-trodden  ground,  and  Origen  had  no  ditii- 
culty  in  meeting  it.  Its  worst  sting  lay  then,  as  unhappily 
it  has  lain  since  then,  in  the  unhappy  party-divisions  of 
Christendom.  Jews,  Ebionites,  Gnostics,  Heretics,  Schis- 
matics, and  Catholics,  all  bit  and  devoured  one  another  for 
differences  which  to  Celsus  appeared  ridiculous  (ovov  aKid). 
This  is  his  first  real  point ;  and  it  is  a  point  which  the 
Church  of  Christ  cannot  afford  to  disregard. 


500 


ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 


His  next  argument  touches  the  root  of  Christianity.  Celsus 
is  a  Monotheist.  He  admits  one  Supreme  God,  good,  beauti- 
ful, and  luippy,  the  Creator  of  the  lower  deities  who  in  their 
turn  created  the  world.  But  of  this  God  little  if  anything 
can  be  known  ;  and  that  only  by  the  purest  and  most  abstract 
thought.  That  such  a  Being  either  should,  would,  or  could 
come  down  into  the  world,  he  declares  to  be  utterly  incon- 
ceivable. What  should  He  come  for  ?  Why  should  He  so 
degrade  His  perfection  ?  Why  should  He  visit  this  world 
rather  than  another,  and  why  Judea  of  all  places  in  the 
world  ?  What  business  have  men  to  think  they  are  an 
object  of  special  concern  to  God  ?  Why  should  not  a  colony 
of  ants  or  bats  with  equal  reason  declare  that  God  had 
come  to  save  tJLcm  .?  and  that  tliey  by  faith  became  children 
of  God  ? 

To  this  Origen  replies  by  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation. 
God  is  known,  so  far  as  man's  knowing  faculties  can  reach, 
in  the  Incarnate  Christ.  Celsus'  string  of  questions,  puzzling 
as  they  are  apart  from  this  truth,  when  viewed  in  the  light  of 
it,  lose  their  point.  All  the  seeming  improbabilities  vanish 
l)eneatli  the  solvent  of  the  Divine  Word  through  love  for 
man  emptying  Himself  of  His  glory,  and  by  taking  man's 
nature  raising  it  to  His  own.  Yet  there  is  a  Haw  in  Ori- 
gen's  argument,  which  Celsus  indeed  could  not  detect,  but 
which  nevertheless  weakens  its  force.  He  dwells  almost 
exclusively  on  the  obscuration  of  the  Divine  in  Christ, 
whereas  the  truer  view  would  be  to  assert  the  Incarnation, 
as  the  result  of  Divine  Love,  to  be  not  so  much  an  obscura- 
tion as  the  highest  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Glory. 

The  third  great  argument  of  Celsus  was  based  on  a  con- 
sideration of  the  historical  Christ.  His  ignoble  birth,  His 
mean  surroundings.  His  ignominious  death,  His  rejection  by 
His  own  peoi)le.  His  acceptance  by  ignorant  and  superstitious 
slaves,  women,  and  children,  His  utter  failure  to  establish 
His  claim  to  Godhead,  are  facts  which  he  triumphantly 
urges  ^  as  proving  His  insignificance. 

*  Ho  did  not  deny  Christ's  miracles,  but  regardcnl  them  as  ordinary 
instances  of  magic  or  imposture.     The  Resurrection  he  utterly  denies,  as 


ORIGEN.  501 

The  reply,  of  Origeii  is  pertinent :  "  How  then  do  you 
account  for  the  rapid  and  increasing  growth  of  Christ's 
religion  ?  Some  adequate  cause  must  have  operated  to 
produce  an  effect  so  momentous,  and  our  hypothesis  is  at 
least  as  adequate  as  yours.  The  Church  is  marching  from 
victory  to  victory,  and  you  are  content  to  explain  its  progress 
by  infatuation  and  imposture." 

It  seems  as  if  Celsus  himself  had  anticipated  this  retort. 
Even  in  his  day  a  seeing  eye  could  discern  on  whose  side 
the  future  lay.  Though  he  lashes  the  social  inferiority  of 
the  Christians  with  withering  scorn,  though  he  ridicules  their 
belief  as  a  delusion,  though  he  arraigns  them  as  sectaries 
whose  very  existence  is  against  the  law  and  full  of  danger  to 
the  State,  yet  he  never  even  alludes  to  those  odious  charges 
which  Tertullian  and  Minucius  found  it  necessary  to  disprove. 
Nay,  so  far  is  he  from  under-estimating  the  gravity  of  the 
situation  that  he  makes  a  strong  appeal  to  the  Christians  to 
reconsider  their  position,  to  give  the  State  what  it  justly 
asks,  and  in  return  to  receive  the  right  of  free  worship. 
"  Surely  they  cannot  expect  the  Empire  to  abandon  its 
ancient  faith  for  a  barbarous  novelty.  Let  the  Church 
make  concessions,  and  Christ  accept  a  place,  as  in  the  Lara- 
rium  of  Alexander  Severus,  side  by  side  with  Apollonius 
of  Tyana  and  the  old  gods  of  Kome."  He  who  thus  pleads 
with  his  mortal  enemy  must  inwardly  acknowledge  that  his 
cause  is  lost.  Celsus  wrote  in  bitterness,  in  wrath,  but  also 
in  despair. 

Origen,  with  fifty  years'  continuous  record  of  success  before 
him,  confronts  Celsus  all  along  the  line.  He  refutes  the 
charges  of  bad  citizenship,  idleness,  selfishness,  faction,  super- 
stitious credulity,  and  points  out  that  the  supposed  defects 
of  Christianity  are  in  reality  its  strength,  specially  the 
revelation  of  Deity  within  the  compass  of  a  human  life,  and 
the  abolition  of  the  great  gulf  between  philosophers  and 
vulgar.     The  Scriptures  are  indeed  unpolished  compositions, 

founded  on  the  testimony  of  a  hysterical  woman  {yvvij  irdpoca-rpos),  and 
attested  by  no  evidence  worthy  of  the  name.  CeLsus  is  certainly  not  yet 
out  of  date  ! 


502  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

•but  it  is  as  easy  to  exaggerate  the  rudeness  of  their  language 
as  it  is  to  over-belaud  its  grace.  One  thing  is  certain.  They 
appeal  to  every  class  of  mind  :  their  range  is  coextensive 
with  humanity. 

Our  readers  will  not  need  to  be  reminded  that  for  Origen 
the  vital  proof  of  his  religion  lay  in  the  answer  of  the  Imman 
s(jul  to  God.  Christ  speaks  direct  to  His  own  image  in  man. 
That  image  cannot  help  recognising  its  prototype.  This  is 
what  constitutes  his  pre-eminence  as  an  apologist.  AVhat- 
ever  other  proofs  he  may  employ,  he  never  leaves  out  of  sight 
tiie  greatest  of  all,  the  only  really  convincing  one,  "  Now 
therefore  that  ye  have  known  God,  or  rather  are  known  of 
Him,  how  turn  ye  again  to  the  weak  and  Ijeggarly  elements?" 
The  Godhead  of  Jesus  shines  as  the  sun  in  lieaven :  it  is  enough 
for  us  that  it  is  there. 

But  Origen  is  not  indifferent  to  secondary  proofs.  First, 
the  growth  of  the  Church  in  spite  of  every  disadvantage. 
This  we  have  already  mentioned.  Then,  side  by  side  with 
it,  the  moral  reformation  which  has  everywhere  accompanied 
the  acceptance  of  Christ's  yoke.  This  also  he  insists  on  again 
and  again.  Thirdly,  the  proof  of  miracles.  This  he  acknow- 
ledges but  lays  far  less  stress  on,  since  even  in  his  day 
miracles  had  passed  into  the  region  of  the  nebulous,  and 
themselves  re(iuired  to  be  proved.^  Fourthly,  the  proof  from 
propliecy.  To  this  he  attaches  greater  importance,  though 
he  admits  it  is  efl'ective  only  for  those  who  already  know  the 
Scriptures.  To  Origen  neither  miracles  nor  prophecy  owed 
their  evidential  value  to  their  character  as  external  prodigies, 
l)ut  as  recurrent  because  eternal  interventions  of  redeeming 
wisdom  and  love.  1  )emons  may  reproduce  Christ's  marvels  ; 
oracles  may  rival  His  prophecies;  but  the  one  unanswerable 
miracle  is  the  spread  of  Cliristian  faitli  and  Cliristian  holi- 
ness ;  the  one  unfailing  propliecy  is  the  inclusion  of  redeemed 
humanity  within  tlic  Church  of  Christ. 

'  In  an  inttTcstinp  passaj^c  {Contra.  Ccls.  ii.  S)  he  confesses  that  but  a 
few  traces  of  miraculous  ^'ifis  remain  in  his  day.  He  attributes  this  in 
his  Homily  on  .Jeremiah  (Horn.  iv.  3)  to  tlie  corruption  of  the  Church. 


ORIGEN.  503 

4.  His  Ecclesiastical  and  Practical  Views. 

In  Origen,  what  we  may  call  the  spiritual  view  of  Chris- 
tian morality  attained  its  highest  point.  He  stands  in  this, 
as  in  other  things,  at  the  close  of  one  epoch  and  at  the  dawn 
of  another.  He  closes  the  epoch  of  joyous  Christian  con- 
sciousness, and  inaugurates  that  in  which  the  sense  of  sin  is 
uppermost.  He  partakes  equally  of  both.  His  intelligence 
basks  in  the  sunlight  of  a  present  Christ.  His  conscience 
groans,  reels  beneath  the  dark  cloud  of  guilt  which  seems  to 
hide  the  face  of  God.  This  contradiction  is  due  to  his  intense 
thoroughness.  Certain  that  God's  purpose  is  to  save  every 
soul,  and  yet  certain  that  every  soul  has  the  awful  power  of 
resisting  that  purpose,  how  could  he  be  otherwise  than  sad  ? 
Moreover,  Origen  could  not  bring  himself  to  accept  that 
which  was  unintellic^ible.  He  strove  as  no  theoloi^ian  has 
ever  striven  before  or  since  to  get  to  the  root  of  things. 
Thus  he  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  imputed  righteousness. 
God  has  called  us  to  be  ricrhteons  even  as  He  is  ri<^hteous, 
and  has  enabled  us  to  achieve  this  end  by  union  with  Christ 
in  His  death  and  life  through  love.  First,  in  His  death  by 
repentance,  then  in  His  life  by  faith,  which  in  the  higher 
spirits  culminates  in  knowledge  {'yviaai^).  But  this  knowledge 
is  not  intellectual  only,  but  becomes  one  with  its  object  by 
love,  and  reveals  itself  in  true  holiness  of  life.^  Yet  freedom 
of  choice  still  remains,  and  we  can  never  speak  of  ourselves 
as  sure  of  heaven.  Starting  from  this  principle,  he  regards 
the  interior  life  as  all-important,  for  our  actions  spring  out 
of  it  and  are  judged  by  it.  Purity  of  conscience  purifies  all 
acts.  The  spiritual  Christian  lives  under  the  direct  inspira- 
tion of  the  Lord. 

This  magnificent  theory  is  too  high  for  Origen  never  to 
fall  below  it.  The  vein  of  literalism  which  led  him  once  to 
court  martyrdom,  to  injure  his  manhood,  and  to  punish  his 
flesh,  was  not  absolutely  discarded  even  in  his  maturer  years. 
Yet  all  critics  have  held  his  Exhortation  to  Martyrs  and  his 

^  Here  again  Plato's  influence  is  seen.  Readers  of  the  Phccdrus  and 
Symposium  will  easily  follow  the  suggestion. 


504         ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Treatise  on  Prayer  to  be  as  pure  examples  of  spiritual  religion 
us  are  to  be  met  with  in  the  early  Church.  We  commend 
these,  especially  the  former,  to  the  study  of  those  who  desire 
to  judge  for  themselves  how  the  soul  of  Origen  could  speak 
when  detached  from  those  speculative  obscurities  which 
ballled  his  high  intellect  and  have  clouded  his  renown. 

With  reference  to  the  Church,  his  teaching  is  not  very 
explicit.  Ecclesiasticism  was  not  his  strong  point.  As 
might  be  expected,  he  draws  a  broad  distinction  between 
the  visible  and  invisible  Church.  It  is  uncertain  when  he 
received  baptism,  but  most  probably  in  childhood.  His 
estimate  of  that  sacrament  is  very  high.  He  allows  but 
one  remission  of  post-baptismal  sin,  except  in  the  case  of 
martyrdom,  which  washes  away  all  guilt.  But  this  refers 
apparently  to  the  Divine  forgiveness,  and  not  to  ecclesias- 
tical excommunication  and  readmission,  which  for  him  are 
concerned  only  with  the  visible  order.  His  own  experience 
of  such  things  here  influenced  his  judgment.  Fur  while 
obedient  to  his  l)ishop's  commands,  and  never  questioning 
the  Church's  right  of  exconnnunication  on  earth,  he  showed 
no  sign  of  retracting  his  views  or  seeking  to  re-enter  the 
general  communion.  The  Church  reposes  on  the  Eock, 
which  is  Christ,  and  on  Teter's  faith,  but  not  on  his  person. 
For  Origen  there  is  no  exclusive  priesthood,  no  altar  but 
the  behever's  heart,  no  genuine  mission  except  that  which 
is  ratified  by  Christ.  With  the  prevailing  tendency  to 
hierarchical  organisation  he  had  no  sympathy.  Authority 
had  no  terrors  for  him.  "What  matters  it  to  me  if  a 
thousand  men  say  a  thing  is  true  if  it  be  condemned  by  the 
judgment  of  God  ?  What  use  if  many  churches  agree  in  one 
doctrine  if  they  are  led  astray  by  opinion  ?  What  I  desire 
above  all  is  that  God  may  confirm  my  views." 

This  confirmation  he  sought  in  Holy  Scrii)ture,  interjiivtcd 
as  we  have  already  shown.  Yet  his  position  betrays  a  weak- 
ness so  soon  as  the  question  arises,  WJiat  is  Scripture  ?  Who 
is  to  define  its  canon  ?  Hence,  at  one  time  he  uses  books  as 
inspired, *  wliih'  granting  liberty  to  others  to  reject  them  ;  at 
•   K.ij.,  the  Shepheril  of  Hennas  :  tlic  Epistle  of  IJarnabas. 


ORIGEN.  505 

another  he  regards  the  canon  as  fixed  beyond  appeal.^  To 
the  voice  of  the  Church's  inner  consciousness,  as  formulated 
not  in  synodical  decrees,  but  in  the  spontaneous  growth  of 
universal  belief,  he  accords  implicit  submission.  But  he 
does  not  see  that  for  the  peq^etuation  of  this  belief  external 
authority  is  absolutely  indispensable.  He  seems  to  cry  with 
Luther,  "Let  God  take  care  of  His  own  Church,"  but  he 
loses  the  force  of  S.  Paul's  similitude  that  the  Church  is  a 
building  erected  on  earth  as  well  as  in  the  eternal  world. 

The  real  gravamen  felt  by  those  who  condemned  him  was 
not  so  much  his  speculative  doctrines,  though  these  were 
afterwards  attacked,  as  his  inconvenient  and  irreducible 
personality.  He  would  not  fall  in  with  the  necessary  move- 
ments of  Church  government.  His  influence  was  enormous  ; 
the  eyes  of  the  world  were  ujDon  him ;  he  must  be  brought 
to  reason  or  cast  out  as  rebellious.  This  last  step  once  taken, 
there  were  plenty  of  excuses  for  it  in  his  opinions  also. 


His  Eschatolog*y. 

Pre-eminently  obnoxious  among  these  was  his  Universalism, 
or  belief  in  the  final  restoration  of  all  souls,  not  excluding 
the  evil  spirits,  which,  though  not  condemned  by  any  authority, 
was  manifestly  contrary  to  the  general  Christian  conscious- 
ness. We  conclude  this  section  with  a  brief  summary  of 
Origen's  eschatology,  for  which  we  are  indebted  to  Dr. 
Hatch's  Hibbert  Lectures.-  It  is  a  cento  of  passages  from 
Origen's  own  works : — 

"The  present  inequalities  of  circumstances  and  character  are 
not  wholly  explicable  within  the  sphere  of  the  present  life.  But 
this  world  is  not  the  only  world.     Every  soul  has  existed  from 

^  Viz.,  in  his  controversy  with  Julius  Africanus.  This,  however,  is 
strictly  speaking  true  only  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  New  Testament 
canon  had  not  been  definitely  fixed  in  his  day. 

2  Dr.  Hatch  has  ably  pieced  it  together  from  several  portions  of  Origen's 
works  in  his  own  words.  It  is  given  in  cxtenso  at  pp.  235-236  of  those 
Lectures,  with  the  references.  The  passage  in  the  text  is  the  concluding 
portion  of  it. 


5o6         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

the  beginninfj;  it  has  therefore  passed  through  some  worlds 
already,  and  will  pass  through  others  before  it  reaches  the  final 
consummation.  It  comes  into  the  world  strengthened  by  the 
victories  or  weakened  by  the  defeats  of  its  previous  life.  Its 
place  in  this  world  as  a  vessel  appointed  to  honour  or  to  dishonour 
is  determined  by  its  previous  merits  or  demerits.  Its  work  in 
tliis  world  determines  its  place  in  the  world  which  is  to  follow 
this. 

"All  this  takes  place  with  the  knowledge  and  under  the 
oversight  of  God.  It  is  an  indication  of  His  ineffable  wisdom 
that  the  diversities  of  natures  for  which  created  beings  are  them- 
selves responsible  are  wrought  together  into  the  harmony  of  the 
world.  It  is  an  indication  not  only  of  His  wisdom  but  of  Ilis 
g<jodness  that,  while  no  creature  is  coerced  into  acting  rightly, 
yet  when  it  lapses  it  meets  with  evils  and  punishments.  All 
P  punishments  are  remedial.  God  calls  what  are  termed  evils  into 
existence  to  convert  and  purify  those  whom  reason  and  admoni- 
tion fail  to  change.  He  is  thus  the  great  Physician  of  Souls. 
The  process  of  cure,  acting  as  it  does  simply  through  freewill, 
takes  in  some  cases  an  almost  illimitable  time.  For  God  is  long- 
sufTcritig,  and  to  some  souls,  as  to  some  bodies,  a  rapid  cure  is 
not  beneficial.  But  in  the  end  all  souls  will  be  thoroughly 
purged.  All  that  any  reasonable  soul,  cleansed  of  the  dregs  of 
all  vices,  and  witli  every  cloud  of  wickedness  completely  wiped 
away,  can  eitlier  feel  or  understand  or  think,  will  be  wholly 
(j!od  :  it  will  no  longer  see  or  contain  anything  else  but  God  ; 
(lod  will  be  the  mode  and  me:isuro  of  its  every  movement;  and 
so  God  will  be  'all.'  Nor  will  there  be  any  longer  any  distinc- 
tion between  good  and  evil,  because  evil  will  nowhere  exist;  for 
God  is  all  things,  and  in  Him  no  evil  inheres.  So  then,  when 
the  end  h.-is  been  i)r()ught  back  to  the  beginning,  that  state  of 
tilings  will  be  restoretl  which  the  rational  creation  had  when  it 
h;ul  no  need  to  eat  of  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil ;  all 
sense  of  wickedness  will  have  been  taken  away ;  He  who  alone 
is  the  one  goo<l  God  becomes  to  the  soul  '  all,'  and  that  not  in 
.sonu^  soids  but  *  in  all.'  There  will  be  no  longer  death,  nor  the 
sting  of  death,  nor  nny  evil  anywhere,  but  God  will  be  'all  in 
all.'  " 


ORIGEN.  507 

5.  His  Influence  and  Literary  Genius. 

We  conclude  this  chapter  with  a  few  remarks  upon  the 
position  of  Origen  in  the  history  of  thought  and  literature, 
and  on  the  general  characteristics  of  his  genius. 

The  general  effect  of  his  personality  in  the  Church  may  be 
judged  not  only  from  the  storm  raised  during  his  life,  but  still 
more  from  the  furious  controversies  tliat  raged  after  his  death. 
They  need  not  be  noticed  here  ;  they  belong  to  the  history  of 
the  Church,  of  which  they  form  a  highly  instructive  chapter. 
Their  final  result  was  to  put  Origen  under  a  ban,  and  to  stamp 
out  his  direct  influence  for  a  thousand  years.  Indirectly,  of 
course,  he  still  guided,  through  the  lips  of  great  Latin  doctors, 
some  of  the  chief  movements  of  theology.  It  was  impossible 
to  avoid  going  over  ground  that  he  had  covered,  and  equally 
impossible  to  avoid  indebtedness  to  him  for  the  treatment  of 
it.  Jerome  and  Augustine,  fortunately  for  Latin  theology  and 
still  more  fortunately  for  mankind,  were  deeply  imbued  with 
his  writings.  Thomas  Aquinas,  writing  in  the  interest  of  the 
Vatican  theocracy,  nevertheless  has  preserved,  imbedded  in 
his  granite  system,  more  than  one  vein  of  Origenistic  ore. 

But  it  is  not  in  the  dogmatics  of  the  Church  that  we  are  to 
look  for  Origen's  best  memorial.  Though  his  subjects  are  tech- 
nical, he  is  a  profoundly  human  writer.  His  greatest  influence 
has  been  outside  the  doctrinal  sphere,  in  the  free  current  of 
unfettered  religious  thought.  Among  theologians  Augustine 
alone  stands  above  him  in  this  respect,  and  probably  even 
Augustine's  influence  will  be  found  to  be  less  pervasive  and 
lasting.  Origen  indeed  wrote  no  book  that  can  be  compared 
for  psychological  interest  with  the  wonderful  Confessions,  nor 
does  his  eloquence  ever  rise  to  the  soaring  heights  of  the 
closing  chapters  of  the  City  of  God.  But  the  foundation  of 
his  doctrine  is  deeper  laid,  and  the  ambition  of  system  does 
not  lead  him  to  contradict  the  instincts  of  Inimnn  nature. ^ 

1  Naturam  cxpellas  furca,  says  the  wise  poet,  Umcn  usque  rccurrct.  We 
are  witnessing?  a  gradual  revolution  in  the  attitude  of  the  human  mind 
towards  the  Augustinian  dogmas  of  sin,  predestination,  and  grace,  which 
have  so  long  been  identified  with  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ. 


5o8         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

Undoubtedly,  liis  weakness  lies  in  the  bulk  of  his  writings. 
He  failed  to  appreciate  the  old  proverb,  "/xeya  ^i^Xlov,  fxiya 
KUKov^^  (a  long  book  is  a  great  evil).  But  though  he  is  little 
read,  his  labour  is  by  no  means  lost.  In  three  respects  at  any 
rate,  we  think  he  has  entered  deeply  into  the  heart  of  the 
Christian  world.  First,  in  his  sublime  confidence  that  spiri- 
tual truth  can  be  reached  by  the  earnest  inquirer ;  secondly, 
in  his  treatment  of  Scripture  as  a  living  voice  of  inspiration ; 
thirdly,  in  his  absolute  and  fearless  trust  in  the  prevailing 
power  of  the  Divine  Love. 

Let  us  examine  these  a  little  more  closely.  He  believes 
that  religious  truth  can  be  searched  for  and  attained.  He 
does  not  begin,  like  too  many  theologians,  by  laying  man's 
reason  under  a  curse.  On  the  contrary,  he  expressly  recog- 
nises its  kinship  with  Deity.  God  has  implanted  the  craving 
for  spiritual  truth  in  man's  inmost  nature,  and  He  intends 
that  craving  to  be  satisfied  in  and  through  man's  highest 
faculties.  This  position  Origen  shares  with  Greek  philo- 
sophy ;  but,  unlike  Greek  philosophy,  Origen  both  begins 
and  ends  with  God.  The  axioms  from  which  truth  starts  are 
to  him  revealed  in  the  Christian's  soul  by  the  manifestation  of 
the  Divine  Word  of  Christ,  and  have  not  to  be  sought  by 
induction  or  abstraction.  At  the  same  time,  they  are  not 
externally  imposed ;  they  are  immanent  in  the  soul,  imme- 
diate and  self-evidencing.  Thus  he  is  enabled  to  construct 
a  system  of  knowledge  as  bold  and  comprehensive  as  any  of 
the  old  Pagan  or  modern  German  systems,  yet  on  the  basis 
of  Church  belief.  But  he  will  not  accept  that  belief  cut  and 
dried.  He  makes  it  the  genuine  expression  of  his  soul's 
intuition  and  reasoned  thought.  Christian  science  is  for 
him  faith  made  perfect,  the  gnosis  which  rises  to  the  direct 
contemplation  of  its  object,  which  mounts  from  the  histori- 
cal Christ  to  the  apprehension  of  the  Eternal  Intelligence 
(Logos). 

The  highest  spiritual  minds  are  now  returning  to  a  similar 
point  of  view.  ^J'he  dreary  doctrine  of  such  books  as  Mansel's 
"  Limits  of  Keligious  Thought  "  is  giving  way  to  a  more  hope- 
ful attitude  towards  the  source  of  revt»lation.     If  Agnosticism 


ORIGEN.  509 

is  to  be  answered,  it  must  be  by  some  such  theory  as  Origen's, 
restated  in  terms  of  the  scientific  intellect.^ 

Our  second  assertion  is  that  Origen's  view  of  Scripture, 
erroneously  as  he  worked  it  out,  is  one  tliat  will  tend  to 
commend  itself  more  and  more  to  the  highest  minds.  He 
links  Scripture  with  external  nature  as  a  living  manifestation 
of  God.  It  is  from  his  writings  that  Bishop  Butler  sought 
the  text  that  suggested  his  own  immortal  work.  The  words 
are  weighty,  though  Origen  can  only  imperfectly  have  realised 
their  significance :  "  He  who  believes  the  Scripture  to  have 
proceeded  from  Him  who  is  the  Author  of  Nature  may  well 
expect  to  find  the  same  sort  of  difficulties  in  it  as  are  found  in 
the  Constitution  of  Nature."  ^  The  great  key  to  nature  is  Evo- 
lution ;  and  the  same  key  is  now  being  applied  to  Revelation. 
The  idea  of  the  historical  progressiveness  of  Revelation  was 
unknown  in  Origen's  day.  Hence,  to  those  who  were  troubled 
by  its  external  inconsistencies  there  seemed  no  course  open 
but  either  to  reject  the  Old  Testament  or  to  allegorise  it. 
The  Gnostics  chose  the  former  alternative,  Origen  the  latter. 
If  we  judge  him  by  the  standpoint  of  our  own  day,  his  method 
must  be  condemned;  but  if  we  have  regard  to  its  spirit 
rather  than  its  execution,  we  shall  find  that  he  has  much 
to  teach  us.  To  him  the  movement  of  the  Divine  Thouo-ht, 
expressing  itself  in  successive  moments  of  human  develop- 
ment through  the  medium  of  human  minds,  suggested  rather 
a  veil  completely  though  not  quite  suddenly  removed  than  the 
organic   process  from    imperfect  apprehension  to  articulate 

^  Is  not  the  first  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  a  beacon-light  in 
connection  with  this  thought?  The  power  and  Godhead  of  the  Eternal 
are  clearly  known,  so  soon  as  they  are  consciously  sought  for,  in  the  realm 
of  nature,  inorganic,  organic  and  human. 

-  Philocal.  p.  23.  XPV  I^-^vtol  ye  tou  dira^  Trapabe^ajxevov  toO  KTiaafTos  t6v 
Koafiov  ehac  ravras  rets  ypa<pas  ireireiadai,  6ti  6(ja  Trepi  Trjs  KTiaeoji  airavrq. 
TOts  ^T]Tov(n  Tov  TTepl  avTTJs  \byov,  ravTa  /cat  Trepi  twu  ypacpQv.  It  should  be 
noticed  that  the  Philocalia  are  an  excellent  collection  of  extracts  from 
Origen's  writings  made  by  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  and  Basil,  sent  by  the 
former  to  Theodosius,  Bishop  of  Tyana,  about  A.D.  382.  It  is  of  much  in- 
terest, not  only  from  its  intrinsic  excellence,  but  as  showing  what  great 
Catholic  saints  held  to  be  characteristic  points  of  Origen's  teaching.  It 
consists  of  twenty-seven  chapters,  and  should  be  read  by  those  who  desire 
to  get  at  the  pith  of  his  teaching  without  perusing  his  complete  works. 


5IO         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

.'ind  conscious  uttoranco.  But  he  grasped  the  parallel  be- 
tween Nature  and  Revelation  as  no  other  grasped  it.  And 
not  only  so,  but  he  discerned  the  significance  of  that  parallel 
in  its  minutest  details.  As  the  student  of  nature  finds  the 
same  importance  in  the  small  fibres  and  hidden  tissues  as  in 
the  expanded  flower,  so  the  student  of  Scripture  finds  infinite 
suggestiveness  in  the  obscurest  corners  and  most  cursor}'  allu- 
sions of  Holy  Writ.  So  too  we,  while  applying  to  the  Old 
Testament  widely  different  methods  of  exegesis  from  those 
of  Origen,  can  trace  the  process  of  spiritual  manifestation 
to  its  culmination  in  Christ,  and  from  Him,  by  deductive 
inference,  reason  down  to  the  subsequent  unfoldings  of  the 
creative  germ  which  He  planted  on  the  earth. 

Our  third  assertion  is  that  Origen,  by  his  absolute  trust  in 
the  final  victory  of  the  Divine  Love,  is  a  genuine  precursor  of 
the  loftiest  modern  aspirations.  Of  all  theological  dogmas, 
there  is  none  that  has  so  deeply  stirred  men's  minds  in 
recent  years  as  that  of  Eternal  Punishment.  Origen  stands 
out  as  the  first  who  ever  ventured  to  probe  this  awful  subject 
to  its  bottom.  On  this  topic  he  is  not  open  to  the  charge 
so  often  justly  brought  against  him,  of  inconsistent  views. 
On  the  cr)ntrarv,  his  theorv  is  both  clear  and  loo-ical.  He  is 
a  thorough-going  Universalist.  He  fearlessly  includes  not 
mankind  only,  but  the  entire  rational  creation,  within  his 
ken.  The  Evil  Spirit  and  his  fallen  angels  are  not  to  be 
debarred  from  a  possibility  which  rests  on  nothing  less  than 
th(^  all-controlling  Will,  the  all-embracing  Love,  of  God.  He 
does  not  rest  it  on  the  work  of  Jesus  Christ :  with  true  insirrht 

o 

he  forbears  to  press  the  Saviour's  atoning  sacrifice  beyond 
the  limits  assigned  to  it  in  Scripture.  But,  regarding  the 
question  as  undetermined  by  Revelation  and  not  foreclosed 
by  the  Church,  he  allows  his  spiritual  aspirations  their  full 
play,  and  sliriuks  not  from  the  utmost  conclusion  to  which 
they  seem  to  point.  That  he  is  dealing  with  mysteries  be- 
yond human  ken  is  un(|uestional)ly  true :  that  the  Church  in 
her  wisdom  has  refrained  from  pronouncing  on  either  side, 
is  a  significant  fact.  Nevertheless,  it  is  certain  that  the 
human  lieart  will  never  rest  without  some  definite  conclusion 


ORIGEN.  511 

on  what  is  after  all  the  most  momentous  of  all  issues.  The 
Latin  Church,  though  refraining  from  absolute  dogmatism, 
offered  a  solution  by  its  doctrine  of  Purgatory  and  Masses 
for  the  dead,  which  gave  practical  satisfaction  to  such  as 
could  accept  it.  ]>ut  no  other  Church  has  been  able  authori- 
tatively to  reconcile  the  deej^est  need  of  the  human  spirit 
with  the  progressive  purification  of  the  intelligent  conscience. 
And  thus  it  appears  that  the  question  is  an  open  one  after 
all,  and  Origen's  solution  cannot  be  peremptorily  set  aside. 
Happy  those  whose  spirits  repose  so  trustfully  in  the  sense 
of  God's  love  as  to  be  content  to  leave  this  mighty  problem 
untouched  by  their  feeble  reason.  Sweet  is  their  peace,  and 
mighty  is  their  witness  to  the  all-sufficingness  of  the  Divine 
decree.  Yet  they  across  whose  souls  the  dark  shadow  of  an 
awful  doubt  has  passed  ought  not  surely  to  be  condemned,  if 
they  strive  with  all  the  earnestness  of  pleading  hope  to  realise 
to  their  trembling  hearts  the  full  meaning  of  that  sublimest 
of  all  predictions,  that  "God  shall  be  all  in  all." 

In  conclusion,  a  word  must  be  said  on  the  literary 
qualities  of  Origen.  He  is  a  great  thinker,  but  not  a  great 
writer.  He  wrote  too  much  and  too  fast.  Scarcely  could 
the  experts  whom  his  friend's  generosity  supplied  equal  on 
their  tablets  the  haste  of  his  rapid  utterance.  He  himself 
was  conscious  of  his  fault.  He  complains  that  Ambrosius 
forced  his  literary  productiveness.  Many  things  were  pub- 
lished which  he  desired  should  never  see  the  light.  His 
extempore  addresses,  indeed,  were  not  taken  down  till  the 
closing  decade  of  his  life.  This  he  insisted  on.  It  would 
have  been  well  if  he  had  been  firmer  with  regard  to  his  other 
writinofs.  His  fame  as  a  theolo^fian  and  his  influence  as  a 
writer  have  both  sufiPered  thereby.  His  style  is  entirely  with- 
out ornament,  except  in  the  Address  to  Martyrs,  and  in  a  few 
other  instances.  Its  charm,  for  it  is  not  devoid  of  charm, 
consists  in  the  glowing  fusion  of  thought  and  emotion,  which 
is  so  characteristic  of  the  man.  His  book  against  Celsus  is, 
from  a  literary  point  of  view,  the  best  of  his  works.  His 
immense  learning  is  everywhere  apparent,  and  yet  is  never 
obtrusive ;  his  keen  temper  is  restrained  by  the  courtesy  of 


512  ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

a  hijj-li-bred  schoLir,  not  unversed  in  courts ;  and  tlio  fulness 
of  liis  thought  is  pleasingly  varied  by  the  constant  necessity 
of  quoting  his  opponent's  words,  causing  thereby  a  livelier 
play  of  syntactical  construction  than  is  usual  in  his  works. 

Besides  occasional  cumbrousness  and  prolixity,  he  falls 
into  the  error,  so  abundantly  common  among  the  Fathers,  of 
Iieaping  up  argument  upon  argument,  generally  to  the  detri- 
ment of  the  effect ;  for,  as  a  rule,  the  best  reasons  are  advanced 
first,  and  supplemented,  hardly  ever  strengthened,  by  a  long 
striner  of  weaker  ones  in  their  rear. 

lie  has  been  contrasted,  and  deservedly,  with  Tertullian. 
No  two  minds  could  be  more  diverse.  The  one  is  modest 
and  tentative,  the  other  is  self-confident  and  positive :  the 
one  is  a  philosopher,  feeling  his  way  to  truth,  content,  should 
fresh  light  appear,  to  efface  his  own  conclusions ;  the  other 
is  an  advocate  pushing  his  case,  mercilessly  pressing  his 
witness  to  the  verge  of  intimidation,  and  never  so  much  as 
suspecting  that  the  whole  truth  is  not  on  his  side :  the  one 
burns  with  a  subdued  though  glowing  flame,  the  other  blasts 
what  he  touches  with  the  scathing  fire  of  the  meteor:  the 
one  is  reasonable  and  yet  eloquent,  the  other  eloquent  yet 
convincing :  the  one  seeks  for  truth,  first  for  himself,  then 
for  the  world,  the  other  holds  truth  in  his  hand,  and  offers  it 
to  his  opponent  at  the  point  of  the  knife.  Yet  these  two 
great  men,  so  different,  are  in  some  respects  alike.  Both 
were  for  a  short  time  unwelcome  visitors  in  the  Roman 
Church ;  both  were  held  to  be  rebellious  to  authority ;  both 
(lied  in  separation  from  the  general  communion ;  both  were 
animated  above  everything  with  the  glorious  consciousness 
that  by  them  the  Holy  Spirit  spoke ;  both  have  left  to  the 
Church  an  immortal  heritage  of  noble  ideas  accepted  while 
rejected,  and  an  example  of  rare  moral  strength,  the  one  in 
attack,  the  other  in  defence ;  the  one  in  contemptuous  but 
honest  exclusiveness,  the  other  in  suffering  and  injured,  but 
pure  and  universal,  charity. 


CHAPTER  A'. 

THE  SUCCESSORS  OF  ORIGEN. 

The  best  answer  to  those  who  impugned  Origen's  teaching 
as  heretical  was  the  fact  that  his  friends  and  pupils  occupied 
for  more  than  a  generation  the  Episcopal  throne  of  Alex- 
andria, while  his  influence  was  predominant  there  until  the 
close  of  the  century. 

Nor  was  it  only  at  Alexandria  that  his  views  were  held  in 
honour.  The  great  names  of  Firmilian,  Bishop  of  Cappa- 
docian  Caesarea,  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  and  Pamphilus,  the 
friend  of  Eusebius,  who  were  all  devoted  to  his  memory, 
sufficiently  attest  the  appreciation  of  his  work  in  the  East. 

We  shall  devote  this  chapter  to  a  brief  notice  of  the  more 
illustrious  of  his  friends,  contemporaries,  and  successors. 

Alexander  of  Jerusalem. 

First  comes  his  tried  friend  and  chivalrous  defender,  Alex- 
ander, Bishop  of  Jerusalem.  This  prelate  was  at  first  bishop 
of  a  small  town  in  Cappadocia.  Having  been  imprisoned  in 
the  persecution  under  Caracalla,  and  obtained  the  honours  of 
conf  essorship  on  his  release,  he  determined  to  visit  Jerusalem 
in  fulfilment  of  a  vow,  and  in  obedience  to  the  warning  of  a 
dream.  His  arrival  coincided  with  a  critical  moment  in  the 
history  of  the  Jerusalem  Church.  Its  bishop  Narcissus  had 
reached  a  great  age,  and  desired  the  assistance  of  a  coadjutor. 
It  is  said  that  a  divine  premonition  had  signified  to  him 
the  day  and  hour  when  the  destined  helper  should  arrive. 
On  that  very  day  and  hour  Alexander  appeared  ;  conse- 
quently, and  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  held  another  see, 
and  that  no  instance  of  episcopal  translation  had  occurred, 

513  2  K 


514  ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

he  was  a])pointt'd  to  tlie  post.  The  gravity  of  the  precedent, 
however,  made  it  advisabk'  to  have  the  decision  ratified  by  a 
synod.  This  was  done  ;  and  Alexander  continued  assistant- 
bishop  till  the  death  of  Narcissus,  after  which  he  administered 
the  see  alone.  He  was  a  man  of  strong  intellect  and  fearless 
character,  and  took  part  in  several  issues  affecting  the  welfare 
of  the  Church.  His  devotion  to  Origen  has  already  been 
mentioned.  The  great  Alexandrian  fully  repaid  it;  in  one 
of  his  homilies  he  bears  testimony  to  the  sweetness  of  the 
bishop's  disposition,  and  the  generous  tone  of  his  teaching. 
A  few  fragments  of  his  correspondence  are  preserved  by 
Eusebius,  but  not  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  judge  of  his 
literary  merits.^  He  survived  till  the  Decian  persecution,  in 
which  he  obtained  the  crown  of  martyrdom. 

Julius  Africanus. 

or  about  the  same  standing,  or  perhaps  a  little  older,  was 
Julius  Africanus,  supposed,  though  without  good  ground,  to 
have  been  Bishop  of  Emmaus  or  Nicopolis.  His  nationality 
is  uncertain  ;  he  is  said  by  some  authorities  to  have  been  a 
Libyan.  Eusebius  treats  of  him  under  Gordian,  who  reigned 
from  A.D.  238  to  244.  H*  he  was  then  in  the  full  maturity 
of  his  powers,  he  may  have  been  born  about  A.D.  170.  "When 
he  became  a  Christian  we  know  not.  He  appears  to  have 
been  an  active  man,  and,  like  Hegesippus,  to  have  made 
several  journeys  for  pur[DOses  of  research.  His  great  work 
was  a  treatise  on  chronology  in  five  books,  intended  to  give 
a  comparative  view  of  sacred  and  profane  liistory  from  the 
creation  to  his  own  time.  It  was  published  under  Elagabalus 
(a.I).  221). 

'  The  following  extract  from  a  letter  to  Origen  is  so  pleasing  that  we 
think  the  reader  will  like  to  see  it  (Eus.  H.  E.  vi.  14) : — "For  this,  as  you 
know,  has  been  God's  will,  that  our  ancestral  friendship  should  remain 
inviolate,  or  rather  should  become  warmer  and  more  ste^idfast.  For  wt- 
regard  those  blessed  men  who  have  gone  before  us  a><  our  fathers,  to  whom 
we  shall  ere  long  be  reunited,  viz.,  Tantjcnus  the  truly  blessed,  my  master, 
and  the  holy  Clement,  my  master  and  my  helper,  and  many  others  we  may 
liave  known,  by  whom  I  got  to  know  you,  my  best  valued  ma>ter  and 
brother." 


JULIUS  AFRICANUS.  515 

These  Chronologies  occupied  an  important  place  in  con- 
troversy. Both  Jews  and  Pagans  sneered  at  the  Christian 
system  as  modern  and  devoid  of  historical  prestige.  Philo 
and  Josephus  had  successfully  vindicated  the  antiquity  of 
Judaism  as  against  the  heathen  religions.  But,  in  order  to 
obtain  a  similar  respect  for  Christianity,  it  was  necessary  to 
show  that  its  roots,  like  those  of  Judaism,  were  planted  firmly 
in  the  past.  Origen  and  Clement  had  approached  this  question 
from  the  broadest  point  of  view,  by  tracing  the  progressive 
manifestation  of  the  Divine  Logos  in  all  human  history.  The 
more  usual  course  was  to  connect  Christianity  genealogically 
with  Judaism,  the  antiquity  of  which  was  on  all  sides  con- 
fessed. Africanus  followed  this  method.  His  book  secured 
the  favourable  opinion  of  Eusebius,  who  incorporated  many 
of  its  conclusions  into  his  own  Chronicon.  In  spite  of  con- 
siderable astronomical  knowledge,  his  treatment  of  the  early 
period  was,  as  far  as  the  time  of  Abraham,  largely  mystical, 
after  which  his  calculations  were  based  chiefly  on  historical 
data.  He  seems  to  have  known  sufficient  Hebrew  to  verify 
the  numerical  computations  of  the  LXX  by  the  original  text. 
In  reconciling  the  Egyptian  and  Chaldean  chronologies  with 
that  of  the  Old  Testament,  he  used  Manetho  and  Berosus. 
In  accounting  for  the  Greek  mythology,  he  adopts  the 
principles  of  Euhemerus,  and  considers  the  gods  to  have 
been  deified  human  beings.  In  his  third  book  he  attempted 
to  synchronise  the  leading  events  of  Eastern  and  Greek  his- 
tory after  the  first  Olympiad  with  that  of  the  Bible.  Of  this 
portion  of  his  work  several  fragments  are  inserted  in  Routh's 
Beliquicc.  The  following  book  supplied  an  epitome  of  events 
from  the  time  of  Antigonus  to  that  of  Augustus  and  Herod. 
The  last  book  contained  an  interesting  disquisition  on  the 
seventy  weeks  of  Daniel's  prophecy.  This  fragment  is  put 
together  by  Routh  partly  from  Syncellus,  partly  from  extracts 
given  by  Eusebius  in  his  Dcmonstratio  Evangclica. 

Another  important  work  of  Africanus  bore  the  somewhat 
fanciful  title  of  Cestl,  or  "  Variegated  Girdles,"  which  we  may 
compare  with  such  titles  as  "  The  Tapestries,"  "  The  Meadow," 
"The  Nosegay,"  &c.,  which  were  commonly  in  vogue.     This 


5i6  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

work  seems  to  have  been  of  a  secular  cliaracter.  Its  contents 
comprised  geograpliy,  natural  history,  medicine,  agriculture, 
and  the  art  of  war.  There  is  no  reason  on  this  account  to 
doubt  its  authorship,  but  it  obviously  belongs  to  Africanus' 
i\'igan  days.i  Africanus  was  not  a  missionary  or  a  theological 
teacher :  he  belonged  to  the  class  of  Christian  philosophers. 
His  interest  lay  in  the  scientific  studies  which  bear  upon 
Christianity,  such  as  chronology,  ethnology,  and  philology. 
The  assumption  that  he  was  a  bishop  is  so  doubtful  that  we 
need  pay  no  regard  to  the  Syrian  tradition  which  ascribes 
to  him  in  that  capacity  certain  commentaries  on  the  New 
Testament. 

It  is  in  the  realm  of  Biblical  criticism  that  he  desei-ves  the 
chiefest  praise.  Two  documents  of  this  class  have  come  down 
to  us.  The  first  is  a  comparison  of  the  two  genealogies  of 
our  Lord,  which  are  accounted  for  by  the  hypothesis  of  the 
two  lines  of  natural  and  legal  descent.  He  shows  that  these 
were  always  carefully  distinguished  by  the  Jews,  and  in- 
stances the  records  of  Herod's  family  as  a  case  in  point.  He 
adds  the  curious  remark  that  the  early  Jews,  not  having  had 
a  firm  faith  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  endeavoured  to 
secure  a  kind  of  secondary  immortality  by  carefully  preserving 
the  names  of  all  their  heads  of  families.  We  may  compare 
the  custom  of  embalming  in  Egypt,  the  Roman  practices 
of  adoption  and  exhibition  of  Imaffincsm  the  family  hall,  and 
still  more  pertinently,  the  modern  Comtist  Calendar. 

The  second  instance  of  Africanus'  critical  sagacity  consists 
in  a  letter  he  wrote  to  Origen  on  the  question  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  History  of  Susanna.  It  appears  that  in  a  public 
discussion  Origen  had  cited  the  work  as  authoritative.  Afri- 
canus was  present,  but  his  respect  for  the  great  master  kept 
him  silent.  He  afterwards,  though  with  some  diffidence, 
committed  his  objections  to  writing,  and  they  are  very  much 
to  the  point.     He  observes  (i)  that  the  work  is  lacking  in 

^  It  is  odd  that  the  mere  fact  of  a  book's  contents  being  of  a  secular 
kind  should  bo  evidence  that  it  was  not  written  by  a  Christian.  Nothing 
can  more  strongly  illustrate  the  intensity  of  the  Christians'  antagonism  to 
the  world.     The  reader  is  referred  back  to  the  Introductory  Essay,  p.  i,  n. 


GREGORY  THAUMATURGUS.  517 

external  testimon}^,  not  being  included  in  the  canon  of  the 
Jews ;  (2)  that  its  original  language  must  have  been  Greek, ' 
not  Hebrew,  since  the  play  on  words  which  Daniel  employs 
to  bring  home  his  judgment  on  the  elders  is  peculiar  to  the 
former  language,  and  has  no  parallel  in  Hebrew;  (3)  that 
the  prophetic  gift  ascribed  to  Daniel  in  this  book  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  form  in  which  it  appears  in  the  genuine 
Daniel,  the  one  being  an  afflatus,  the  other  an  understanding 
of  visions  and  dreams ;  (4)  that  genuine  prophets  do  not 
quote  Scripture  to  enforce  their  sayings,  whereas  Daniel  is 
represented  as  doing  this.  Origen  replies  at  considerable 
length,  but,  though  ingenious,  he  is  unconvincing,  and  in- 
ferior in  grasp  of  the  problem  to  Africanus.  After  throwing 
out  various  conjectures,  he  falls  back  upon  the  old  argument 
that  has  done  duty  so  often  since,  that  it  is  safest  to  accept 
the  entire  body  of  Scripture  as  it  has  been  handed  down 
to  us.  As  Origen  wrote  from  Nicomedia,  the  date  of  the 
correspondence  will  be  either  A.D.  228,  or  more  probably 
A.D.  240. 

Gregory  Thaumaturgus. 

Another  contemporary  of  Origen,  to  whom  we  are  indebted 
for  our  knowledge  of  his  educational  method,  is  Theodorus, 
called  Greg'Ory  at  his  baptism,  and  afterwards  known  as 
Thaumaturgus,  the  Wonder- Worker,  Bishop  of  Neo-Cicsarea 
in  Pontus.  This  celebrated  saint,  who  is  himself  the  subject 
of  unbounded  panegyric  by  the  two  other  Gregories  and  Basil, 
has  come  down  to  literature  as  pre-eminently  the  admirer 
and  panegyrist  of  Origen.  He  was  born  at  Neo-Ceesarea 
early  in  the  third  century,  of  wealthy  and  noble  parents. 
His  father  was  a  devout  pagan,  and  destined  Gregory  for 
the  profession  of  a  pleader.  With  this  object  he  sent  him 
to  study  Roman  jurisprudence  at  Berytus  in  Syria,  a  city 
which  Gregory  tells  us  was  to  a  considerable  extent  Latinised 
(Pco/jLa'iK(i)T€pa  ri?).  He  had  hardly  arrived  there  when  the 
occasion  of  his  sister's  journey  to  Ca:snrea  to  join  her 
husband  made  it  necessary  for  him  to  accompany  her  as  part 
of  her  escort.     At  Cirsarea  he  and  his  brother  Athenodorus 


5i8         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

came  into  contact  witli  the  man  who  was  destined  to  revolu- 
tionise both  their  lives.  Origen  was  now  settled  to  his  work 
as  a  theological  teacher,  and,  with  characteristic  insight,  he 
at  once  addressed  his  matchless  powers  of  attraction  to  the 
task  of  gaining  over  this  able  and  generous-hearted  student. 
He  was  eminently  successful.  Gregory  at  first  attempted  to 
resist  tlio  great  teacher's  wondrous  spell,  clearly  discerning 
that  if  admitted  it  must  profoundly  modify  his  career  and  set 
before  him  a  new  ideal  of  life.  Soon,  however,  he  surrendered 
to  the  heaven-sent  influence,  and  became  an  enthusiastic  and 
in  every  way  worthy  disciple.  For  more  than  five  years  their 
intercourse  was  continued,  until  in  a.d.  238  Gregory  left  for 
Neo-Cii}sarea,  a  baptized  and  whole-hearted  Christian.  After 
no  long  interval,  the  bishopric  fell  vacant,  and  Gregory  was 
selected  for  the  post.  Unwilling  to  undertake  so  great  a 
responsibility,  he  was  induced  by  a  stratagem  to  accept 
consecration,  and  laboured  till  the  close  of  his  life  (a.d.  270) 
with  the  most  extraordinary  success.  Tradition  asserts  that 
when  first  he  left  his  native  town  tliere  were  only  seventeen 
Christians  in  it,  and  that  at  the  date  of  his  death  there  were 
but  seventeen  heathens. 

The  events  of  his  spiritual  life,  as  well  as  the  imposing 
catalogue  of  his  miracles,  belong  to  the  sphere  of  Church 
history,  and  need  not  occupy  us  here.  His  genuine  writings 
bf^tray  no  consciousness  of  supernatural  endowments.  Their 
modest  tone  forms  a  pleasing  commentary  on  the  halo  of 
thaumaturgic  majesty  with  which  within  a  century  of  his 
death  his  fame  was  encircled. 

He  is  credited  with  being  a  voluminous  writer.  A  con- 
siderable number  of  fragments  are  ascribed  to  him,  of  which 
four  are  genuine.  The  dubious  or  spurious  treatises  are 
more  numerous — (i.)  A  Sect ional  Confession  of  Faith}  which, 
interesting  as  it  is,  must  from  various  expressions  it  contains 

*  The  Greek  title  is  very  obscure,  iKdeais  ttjs  Kara  /x^poi  iriarfui.  It  is 
variously  explained  as  (i)  an  exposition  of  the  faith  in  part,  or  by  parts. 
Tlie  Jesuit  coniniontator  Franciscus  Torrensis  renders  \l  fides non  un ivcrsa  sal 
ex  parte,  by  which  is  to  be  understood,  a  creed  not  of  all  the  doijmas  of 
the  Church,  but  only  of  some,  in  opjwsition  to  the  heretics  who  deny 
them. 


GREGORY  THAUMATURGUS.  519 

be  referred,  at  any  rate  in  its  present  form,  to  the  Post-Nicene 
age.  It  is,  however,  highly  probable  that  some  such  state- 
ment was  formulated  by  Gregory.  (2.)  A  F^rtf/ment  from  his 
Discoitrse  on  the  Trinity,  translated  by  Mai  from  the  Arabic.^ 
Twelve  Topics  on  the  Faith,  which  obviously  belong  to  a  later 
age.-  (3.)  A  Discourse  addressed  to  Tatian  on  the  Subject  of 
the  Soul.  (4.)  Foiir  Homilies,  three  on  the  Annunciation,  and 
one  on  the  Holy  Theophany.  (5.)  Fragment  of  a  Commen- 
tary on  S.  Mattheiu,  which  may  or  may  not  be  genuine.  (6.) 
A  Discourse  on  All  the  Saints. 

His  genuine  writings,  though  short,  are  of  more  than  ordi- 
nary interest.  The  first  is  a  Declaration  of  Faitli^^  which  is 
highly  important  as  revealing  what  Gregory  took  to  be  the 
essential  teaching  of  his  master.     It  is  as  follows :  * — 

"  There  is  one  God,  the  Father  of  the  Living  "Word,  who  is 
His  subsistent  Wisdom  and  Power  and  Eternal  Image ;  perfect 
Begetter  of  the  Perfect,  Father  of  the  only-begotten  Son,  There 
is  one  Lord,  Only  of  the  Only,  God  of  God,  Image  and  Likeness 
of  Deity,  Efficient  Word,  Wisdom  comprehensive  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  all  things,  and  Power  formative  of  the  whole  creation, 
true  Son  of  true  Father,  Invisible  of  Invisible,  and  Incorruptible 
of  Incorruptible,  and  Immortal  of  Immortal,  and  Eternal  of 
Eternal.  And  there  is  only  One  Holy  Spirit,  having  His  sub- 
sistence (u7ra/)g/i/)  from  God,  and  being  made  manifest  by  the  Son, 
to  wit  to  men  ;  Image  of  the  Son,  Perfect  (Image)  of  the  Perfect ; 
Life,  the  Cause  of  the  living  ;  Holy  Fount ;  Sanctity,  the  Supplier 
(or  Leader,  x^P'^y^^)  <^f  Sanctification ;  in  whom  is  manifested 
God  the  Father,  who  is  above  all  and  in  all,  and  God  the  Son,  who 
is  through  all.  There  is  a  perfect  Trinity,  in  glory  and  eternity 
and  sovereignty,  neither  divided  nor  estranged.  Wherefore 
there  is  nothing  either  created  or  in  servitude  in  the  Trinity  ; 
nor  anything  superinduced,  as  if  at  some  former  period  it  was 

^  Given  in  his  Spicilegium  liomnnum,  vol.  iii.  p.  696. 

2  See  Ante-Nicene  Librarj^  vol.  xx.,  in  which  all  the  remain.s  of  Gregory 
are  translated. 

=*  The  title  as  it  stands  has  this  addition,  "  Which  he  had  by  revelation 
from  the  blessed  John  the  Evangelist,  by  the  mediation  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  Parent  of  God." 

*  Ante-Nicene  Library,  xx.  p.  5. 


520  ALEXANDRIAN    SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

non-existent,  and  at  some  later  period  it  was  introduced.  And 
thus  ntitlier  was  tlie  Son  ever  wanting  to  tlie  Father,  nor  the 
Spirit  to  the  Son  ;  but  without  variation  and  without  change  the 
same  Trinity  (ubides)  ever," 

Another  writing  w^e  possess  is  a  Paraphrase  (or  ^letaphrase) 
of  the  Booh  of  Ecclrsiastcs.  It  is  not  remarkable  for  acuteness 
or  depth,  but  contains  some  valuable  moral  reflections.  He 
has  quite  misunderstood  the  long  sequence  of  metaphors  in 
the  eleventh  chapter,  and  adds  little  or  nothing  to  the 
criticism  of  the  book.  The  sententious  proverbial  style  of 
Hebrew  philosophy  looks  oddly  in  Greek  trappings.  A  bare 
translation,  like  the  LXX,  though  strange  and  rude  to  Greek 
ears,  is  far  more  effective  than  the  insipid  mixture  of  rhetoric 
and  Ilabbinism  which  is  all  that  Gregory  gives  us. 

A  third  fragment  which  we  must  notice  is  his  "■  Canonical 
Epistle  concerning  those  who  in  the  inroad  of  the  barbarians 
ate  things  sacrified  to  idols,  or  offended  in  certain  other 
matters."  It  is  addressed  to  a  neighbouring  bishop,  who 
had  solicited  his  advice.  We  gather  from  his  language  that 
owing  to  the  persecution  there  had  been  serious  lapses  from  the 
Christian  standard  of  conduct,  and  Gregory  lays  down  canons 
for  the  guidance  of  those  who  had  to  deal  with  the  question. 
It  is  probable  that  the  large  scale  on  which  conversions  had 
taken  place  had  been  unfavourable  to  moral  strictness.  At 
the  first  temptation  many  had  returned  not  only  to  con- 
formity with  the  Pagan  superstition,  but  to  the  commission 
of  ]*agan  atrocities,  which  called  down  the  bishop's  severest 
censure.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  guilt  of  eating  sacrificial 
food,  strangled,  or  blood,  was  almost  universally  held  equally 
heinous  with  that  of  fornication.  Even  Origen  places  them 
in  the  same  category.  It  is  difficult  for  us  to  appreciate  the 
attitude  of  the  early  Church  to  this  question.  But  it  seems 
clear  that  the  regulations  of  the  Jerusalem  Council  formed 
part  of  its  regular  discipline,  and  that  the  broader  judgment 
of  8.  Paul  was  not  followed.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the 
Church  was  actuated  not  only  by  purely  spiritual  considera- 
tions, but  also  by  the  almost  universal  belief  in  the  physical 


GREGORY  THAUMATURGUS.  521 

imiDurity  contracted  by  indiscriminate  indulgence  in  food. 
This  belief  was  by  no  means  so  groundless  as  in  these 
days  it  is  generally  held  to  be.  It  is  possible  without  any 
materialising  tendency  to  hold  that  simplicity  of  diet  con- 
duces directly  to  a  spiritual  frame  of  mind.  Great  medical 
authorities  have  discussed  how  far  it  would  be  desirable,  both 
from  a  physical  and  moral  point  of  view,  to  reconsider  the 
whole  question  of  flesh  diet.  At  any  rate,  the  Church  has 
always  encouraged  a  strict  discipline  of  the  appetite  as  an 
essential  element  in  the  religious  life.  We  need  not  there- 
fore be  surprised  at  the  extreme  vigilance  with  which  the 
prohibition  of  sacrificial  meat  was  guarded. 

We  now  come  to  the  most  interesting  relic  of  Gregory's 
pen,  the  well-known  panegyric  on  Origen,  delivered  in  his 
presence,  on  the  eve  of  the  speaker's  departure  from  Ca3sarea. 
Its  style  is  in  the  verbose  and  artificial  manner  of  the  time, 
but  the  strain  of  praise  comes  from  the  heart,  and  does  the 
highest  honour  to  both  giver  and  receiver.  Gregory  compares 
their  friendship  to  that  of  David  and  Jonathan,  the  soul  of 
the  lesser  comrade  being  knit  to  that  of  the  greater  in  indis- 
soluble loyalty.  It  must  have  been  no  small  comfort  to  the 
great  teacher  to  see  how  noble  a  compensation  God  had  pro- 
vided for  his  loss  of  position  and  country  in  the  devoted  love 
of  this  pupil,  soon  to  attain  the  honours  of  the  most  eminent 
sainthood,  and  to  give  to  posterity  a  reading  of  his  master's 
character  with  which  the  most  prejudiced  opponent  would 
have  to  reckon. 

After  detailing  the  circumstances  of  his  early  life,  and 
pointing  out  how  each  step  was  controlled  by  the  guiding 
hand  of  God,  he  expresses  the  deepest  gratitude  for  those 
five  happy  years  of  spiritual  communion,  the  sundering  of 
which  he  compares  to  the  departure  of  Adam  from  Paradise. 
He  sketches  in  warm  but  discriminating  language  the  means 
by  which  Origen  had  won  him  over  to  the  truth,  and  gives  a 
lifelike  picture  of  his  educational  method.  To  this  we  have 
referred  in  a  previous  chapter.  We  shall  only  remark  here 
that,  allowing  for  the  progress  in  critical  principles  since 
Origen's  day,   no    sounder  course  of    mental   and   spiritual 


522  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

trainiug   could  be   desired.      The   following   noble   passage 
breathes  the  very  spirit  of  Origen  : — 

"  He  constrained  us,  if  I  may  so  speak,  to  practise  righteous- 
ness on  the  ground  of  the  personal  action  of  the  soul  itself,  which 
he  persuaded  us  to  study,  drawing  us  off  from  the  officious 
anxieties  of  life,  and  from  the  turbulence  of  the  forum,  and 
rjiising  us  to  tlie  nobler  vocation  of  looking  into  ourselves  and 
dealing  with  the  things  tliat  concern  ourselves  in  truth.  Now, 
that  this  is  to  practise  righteousness,  and  that  this  is  the  true 
righteousness,  some  also  of  our  ancient  philosophers  have  asserted. 
...  To  practise  righteousness  after  this  fashion,  therefore,  he 
impressed  on  us  by  a  sort  of  force.  And  he  educated  us  to 
prudence  none  tlie  less,  teaching  us  to  be  at  home  with  ourselves, 
and  to  desire  and  endeavour  to  know  ourselves,  which  indeed  is 
the  most  excellent  achievement  of  philosophy.  .  .  .  And  that 
this  is  the  genuine  function  of  prudence,  and  that  such  is  the 
lieavenly  prudence,  is  affirmed  well  by  the  ancients ;  for  in  this 
there  is  one  virtue  common  to  God  and  man  ;  while  the  soul  is 
exercised  in  beholding  itself  as  in  a  mirror,  and  reflects  the 
Divine  Mind  in  itself,  if  it  is  worthy  of  such  a  relation,  and 
traces  out  a  certain  inexpressible  method  for  the  attaining  of  a 
kind  of  deification." 

II is  impression  of  the  sanctity  of  his  master's  life  is  forcibly 
shown  by  the  following  striking  words : — 

"  Who  alone  of  all  men  of  the  present  time  with  whom  I  have 
been  acquainted,  or  of  whom  I  have  heard  by  the  report  of  others, 
has  so  deeply  studied  the  clear  and  luminous  oracles  of  God  as  to 
he  able  at  once  to  receive  their  meaning  into  his  own  mind,  and 
to  convey  it  to  others.  For  that  Leader  of  all  men,  who  inspires 
(Jod's  dear  prophets,  and  suggests  all  their  prophecies  and  their 
mystic  and  lieavenly  words,  has  honoured  this  man  as  He  would 
a  friend,  and  has  constituted  him  an  expounder  of  these  same 
or.icles ;  and  things  of  which  He  only  gave  a  hint  by  others  lie 
made  matters  of  full  instruction  by  this  man's  instrumentality. 
....  Now,  this  greatest  of  gifts  this  man  has  received  from 
(Jod,  and  this  noblest  of  all  endowments  he  has  had  bestowed 
upon  him  from  heaven,  that  he  should  bo  an  interpreter  of  the 
oracles  of  (lod  to  men,  and  .should  understand  tlu>  words  of  God, 
even  as  if  (Jod  spake  them  to  him,  and  should  recount  them  to 
men  in  such  wi.se  that  thev  mis^lit  liear  them  witli  intelH<xence." 


DIONYSIUS   THE  GREAT.  523 

It  is  pleasant  to  know  that  this  ardent  affection  was  fully 
reciprocated.  As  soon  as  Gregory  had  reached  home,  Origen 
wrote  him  a  letter,  ex[oressing  his  deep  sense  of  his  pupil's 
spiritual  aptitude,  and  counselling  him  to  press  forward  to 
yet  higher  attainments,  and,  by  daily  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
to  prepare  himself  for  the  lofty  career  that  awaited  him. 

Dionysius  the  Great. 

We  pass  now  to  Alexandria,  where,  on  Heraclas'  appoint- 
ment to  the  bishopric,  Dionyslus,  another  pupil  of  Origen's, 
succeeded  to  the  Catechetical  (a.d.  232)  and  finally  to  the 
Episcopal,  chair  (a.d.  248).  Dionysius  the  Great,  as  he  is 
deservedly  called,  is  one  of  the  purest,  noblest  souls  of  the 
early  Church.  Born  to  wealth  and  influence,  he  surrendered 
both  to  become  a  Christian.  He  attended  Origen's  class, 
and  was  ordained  presbyter  before  232.  At  his  death  in 
265  he  was  already  an  old  man.  His  episcopate  fell  in 
troubled  times,  times  of  controversial  bitterness,  times  of 
fierce  persecution,  and  times  of  physical  calamity.  In  all 
these  troubles  he  took  a  leading  part,  sparing  neither  his 
strength  nor,  what  is  a  much  rarer  thing,  his  personal  feel- 
ings. He  carried  the  temper  of  Origen  into  active  life.  As 
a  consequence,  he  was  often  misunderstood,  but  by  perfect 
frankness  and  true  humility  he  was  able  to  right  himself. 
His  writings  were  numerous,  but  called  forth  chiefly  by  the 
exigencies  of  events. 

He  is  conspicuous  among  Churcli  rulers  for  his  faitli  in  the 
power  of  argument.  He  rested  neither  on  the  infallibility  of 
synods  nor  on  the  efiicacy  of  anathema,  but  always  and 
solely  on  discussion  conducted  with  sympathetic  courtesy  on 
both  sides. 

It  is  to  Eusebius  that  we  are  indebted  for  tlie  best  account 
of  his  life  and  character,  and  for  the  preservation  of  the  most 
important  fragments  of  his  works.  These  are  divisible  into 
three  classes,  controversial  treatises,  letters,  and  commentaries.^ 

1  The  list  is  as  follows  :— (a)  Fraf2:ment  from  the  two  Books  on  the 
Promises,  in  opposition  to  Nepos,  an  Egyptian  bishop.     This  is  translated 


524         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

The  remains  of  such  a  writer  are  all  worthy  of  perusal. 
But  there  is  one  of  such  exceeding  interest  that  we  think 
it  best  to  quote  it  entire.  It  is  taken  from  his  treatises  "  On 
the  Promises,"  a  book  directed  against  the  opinions  of  Nepos, 
an  Eg}']^tian  bishop,  who  had  been  the  leading  champion  of 
millenarian  views  in  that  country,  and  had  written  a  treatise 
called  "  A  Refutation  of  the  Allegorists."  Nepos  had  recently 
died  ;  but  his  views  became  more  and  more  poj^ular.  There 
had  always  been  a  strong  party  at  Alexandria  who  disapproved 
of  the  philosophical  theology  of  the  Christian  Platonists,  and 
were  more  particularly  hostile  to  their  theory  of  exegesis. 
Clement  complains  of  them  more  than  once,  and  Origen  shows 
in  several  places  that  he  has  them  in  view.  To  the  school  of 
thought  of  which  Origen  and  Dionysius  were  the  leading 
representatives,  the  doctrine  of  the  millennium  was  extremely 
distasteful,  as  it  was  also  from  a  totally  different  point  of  view 
to  the  Roman  Church.  To  Origen  its  objectionable  feature 
lay  in  its  literalism ;  in  its  regarding  the  final  glory  of  the 
redeemed  as  essentially  a  reproduction  of  the  actual  Church, 
merely  changed  from  militant  to  triumphant,  and  in  no 
proper  sense  idealised  or  spiritualised.  To  Rome  the  fault 
of  Chiliasm  lay  in  its  interference  with  the  Church's  orderly 
march  towards  the  conquest  of  the  world,  which  was  the 
Roman  conception  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  from  which 
the  continued  shocks  of  an  expected  catastrophe  tended  to 
divert  the  Christian  mind. 

'J'he  stronghold  of  the  ^lillenarians  had  always  been  the 

in  tliG  text,  Eus.  H,  E.  vii.  24,  25.  (b)  From  his  ]Jook  on  Nature  nj::ainst 
the  p]picureans,  Eus.  Prrrp.  Ev.  xiv.  23-27.  (c)  From  his  Books  apcainst 
Sabellius,  Eus,  Pi(rp.  Ev.  vii.  19.  [d)  From  his  Letter  to  Dionysius  of  Kome 
on  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity,  collected  chiefly  from  the  works  of 
Athanasius.  (f)  Epistle  to  Ba^silides,  containinp:  Canons  on  Matters  of 
Ecclesiastical  Discipline.  (/)  Letters  to  Domitius  and  Didynius,  to 
Novatus,  to  Fabins  of  Antioch  on  the  persecution,  to  Cornelius  of  Rome, 
to  Stephen  on  the  question  of  re-baptism,  to  Sixtus,  Dionysius  Sixtus ; 
also  a  justification  of  his  behaviour  in  the  persecution  ap:ainst  the  accusa- 
tions of  Germanus  ;  letters  to  llornianimon.  to  the  Alexandrians,  to  Hierax. 
These  are  all  piven  in  Eus.  H.  E.,  Books  vi.  and  vii.  (7)  Tlic  portions  of 
Commentaries  on  Ecclesiastes  and  S.  Luke  are  piven  in  (Julland's  Jiiblio- 
hcca  vctcrum  iiatrnm. 


DIONYSIUS  THE   GREAT.  525 

Book  of  Revelation.  So  long  as  this  book  came  stamped  with 
S.  John's  authority,  it  would  necessarily  hold  an  exalted  place 
among  inspired  writings.  Dionysius,  on  critical  grounds  alone, 
ventured  to  assail  its  authenticity.  This  criticism  forms 
the  kernel  of  his  letter.  But  the  personal  considerations 
with  which  it  commences  are  also  of  the  highest  interest, 
as  showing  the  charitable  temper  of  the  bishop,  and  the 
immense  pains  he  was  willing  to  take  in  order  to  convince, 
not  to  overawe,  those  who  differed  from  him.  The  translation 
is  taken  from  that  in  the  Ante-Nicene  Library  :  ^ — 

"  But  as  they  produce  a  certain  composition  by  Nepos,  on 
which  they  insist  strongly,  as  if  it  demonstrated  incontestably 
that  there  will  be  a  temporal  reign  of  Christ  upon  earth,  I  have 
to  say,  that  in  many  other  respects  I  accept  the  opinions  of  Nepos, 
and  love  him  at  once  for  his  faith,  and  his  laboriousness,  and  his 
patient  study  in  the  Scriptures,  as  also  for  his  great  efforts  in 
psalmody,  by  which  even  now  many  of  the  brethren  are  delighted. 
I  hold  the  man,  too,  in  deep  respect  still  more,  inasmuch  as  he 
has  gone  to  his  rest  before  us.^  Nevertheless,  the  truth  is  to  be 
prized  and  reverenced  above  all  things  else.  If,  then,  he  had 
been  himself  present,  and  had  been  stating  his  opinions  orally, 
it  would  have  been  sufficient  to  discuss  the  question  together 
without  the  use  of  writing,  and  to  endeavour  to  convince  our 
opponents  and  carry  them  along  by  interrogation  and  reply.  .  .  . 
Being  then  in  the  Arsinoitic  prefecture,  where  this  doctrine  was 
current  long  ago,  I  called  together  the  presbyters  and  teachers 
among  the  brethren  of  the  villages,  and  such  of  the  brethren  also 
as  wished  to  attend  were  present.  I  exhorted  them  to  make  an 
investigation  into  that  dogma  in  public.  Accordingly,  when 
they  had  brought  this  book  {i.e.,  the  work  of  Nepos)  before  us, 
as  though  it  were  a  kind  of  weapon  oi-  impregnable  battlement, 
I  sat  with  them  for  three  days  in  succession,  from  morning  till 
evening,  and  attempted  to  set  them  right  on  the  subjects  pro- 
pounded in  the  composition.     Then,  too,  I  was  greatly  gratified 

^   Vol.  XX.  pp.  161  sqq. 

-  The  idea  that  his  earlier  passage  to  the  unseen  world  gives,  as  it  were, 
greater  value  to  a  man's  testimony,  is  to  be  discerned  also  in  the  Letter  of 
Polycrates  (see  above,  page  370),  where  various  saints  are  quoted  "  who 
now  sleep  in  the  Lord,"  but  who  will  rise  again  at  the  grent  day  to  main- 
tain if  necessary  their  true  opinions. 


526  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOCV. 

by  observin<(  the  constancy  of  the  brethren,  their  love  of  the 
tnitli,  tlioir  docility  and  intelligence,  as  we  proceeded,  in  an 
orderly  method,  and  in  a  spirit  of  moderation,  to  deal  with  ques- 
tions, and  difficulties,  and  concessions.  For  we  took  care  not  to 
press,  in  every  way  and  with  jealous  ur^^ency,  opinions  which 
had  once  been  adopted,  oven  althouf,di  they  might  appear  to  be 
correct.  Neither  did  we  evade  objections  alleged  by  others ;  but 
we  endeavoured  as  far  as  possible  to  keep  to  the  subject  in  hand, 
and  establish  the  positions  pertinent  to  it.  Nor,  again,  were  we 
ashamed  to  change  our  opinions  if  reason  convinced  us,  and  to 
acknowledge  the  fact :  but  rather,  with  a  good  conscience,  and  in 
all  sincerity,  and  with  open  hearts  before  God,  we  accepted  all 
that  could  be  established  by  the  demonstrations  and  teachings  of 
the  IToly  Scriptures,  and  at  last  the  author  and  introducer  of  this 
doctrine,  whose  name  was  Coracion,  in  the  hearing  of  all  the 
brethren  present,  made  acknowledgment  of  his  position,  and 
engaged  to  us  that  he  would  no  longer  hold  by  his  opinion,  nor 
discuss  it,  nor  mention  it,  nor  teach  it,  as  he  had  been  completely 
convinced  by  the  argiunents  advanced  against  it.  The  rest  of  the 
brethren,  also,  who  were  present,  were  delighted  with  the  con- 
ference, and  with  the  conciliatory  spirit  and  harmony  exhibited 
by  all.' 

A  little  further  on,  referring  to  the  different  estimates  of 
the  Apocalypse  of  S.  John,  he  says : — 

"  I,  for  my  part,  could  not  venture  to  set  this  book  aside,  for 
there  are  many  brethren  who  value  it  highly.  Yet,  having 
formed  an  idea  of  it  as  a  composition  exceeding  my  capacity  of 
understanding.  I  regard  it  as  containing  a  kind  of  hidden  and 
wonderful  intelligence  on  the  several  subjects  which  come  under 
it.  I  do  not  measure  and  judge  its  expressions  by  the  standard 
of  my  own  reason  ;  but,  making  more  allowance  for  faith,  1  have 
simply  regarded  them  as  too  lofty  for  my  comprehension,  and  1 
do  not  forthwith  reject  what  I  do  not  understand,  but  I  am  only 
the  more  filled  with  wonder  at  it,  in  that  I  have  not  been  able  to 
discern  its  import." 

After  exaniinin<^^  the  whole  book,  and  ])rovin<^  that  it 
cannot  be  interpreted  according  to  tlw  bald  literal  sense, 
he  continues : — 


DIONYSIUS  THE   GREAT.  527 

"  That  tke  writer  was  called  John  I  do  not  deny.  I  admit, 
further,  that  it  is  the  work  of  some  holy  and  inspired  man.  But 
I  could  not  so  easily  admit  that  this  was  the  Apostle,  the  son  of 
Zebedee,  the  same  person  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  Catholic 
Epistle.  But  from  the  character  of  both,  and  the  forms  of  ex- 
pression, and  the  whole  disposition  and  execution  of  the  book,  1 
draw  the  conclusion  that  the  authorship  is  not  his.  For  the 
Evangelist  nowhere  else  subjoins  his  name,  and  he  never  once 
proclaims  himself  either  in  the  Gospel  or  in  the  Epistle." 

This  argument  is  dealt  with  at  considerable  length.  It 
concludes  thus : — 

"  That  it  is  a  John,  then,  who  writes  these  things  we  must 
believe,  for  he  himself  tells  us.  What  John  this  is,  however,  is 
uncertain.  For  he  has  not  said,  as  he  often  does  in  the  Gospel, 
that  he  is  the  disciple  beloved  by  the  Lord,  or  that  leaned  on 
His  bosom,  or  the  brother  of  James,  or  one  that  was  privileged 
to  see  and  hear  the  Lord.  And  surely  he  would  have  given  us 
some  of  these  indications  if  it  had  been  his  purpose  to  make  him- 
self clearly  known.  .  .  .  There  were  probably  many  Johns,  .  .  . 
and  I  think  that  this  John  was  one  of  those  who  were  in  Asia. 
For  it  is  said  that  there  were  two  monuments  in  Ephesus,  and 
that  each  of  these  bears  the  name  of  John. 

"  And  from  the  ideas,  and  expressions,  and  collocations  of  the 
same  John,  it  may  reasonably  be  conjectured  that  this  one  is 
distinct  from  him.  For  the  Gospel  and  Epistle  agree  with  each 
other,  and  both  commence  in  the  same  way.  For  the  one  opens 
thus,  '  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word  ; '  while  the  other  opens 
thus,  'That  which  was  from  the  beginning.'  The  one  says,  *  The 
Word  was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us ;  and  we  beheld  His 
glory,  tlie  glory  as  of  the  Only-begotten  of  the  Father.'  The 
other  says  the  same  things  with  a  slight  alteration,  '  That  which 
we  have  heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  have 
looked  upon,  and  our  hands  have  handled,  of  the  Word  of  life : 
and  the  life  was  manifested.'  .  .  ,  Thus  he  keeps  to  himself,  and 
does  not  diverge  inconsistently  from  his  subjects,  but  goes  through 
them  all  under  the  same  heads  and  in  the  same  phraseologies. 
Thus  the  attentive  reader  will  find  the  phrases,  the  life^  tlte  lnjht, 
occurring  often  in  both  ;  and  also  such  expressions  asjlecbigjrom 
darkne6i<j  holdiwj  the  truth,  grace,  jog,  the  jlexJt  and  Idood  of  the 
Lord,  the  judgment,  the  remission  of  sins,  t/ie  love  of  God  towards 


528         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

/f.f,  tilt'  commajuhiient  of  luce  on  our  side  toicard  tacit  oilier.  .  .  . 
And  ultogether,  through  their  whole  course,  it  will  be  evident 
that  the  Gospel  and  the  E{)i.stle  are  distinguished  by  one  and  the 
samo  character  of  writing,  liut  t}ie  Revelation  is  totally  different; 
neither  does  it  contain  a  syllable  in  common  with  these  other 
books. ^  Nay  more,  the  Epistle,  to  say  nothing  of  the  Gospel, 
does  not  make  any  mention  or  evince  any  notion  of  the  Revela- 
tion ;  and  the  llevelation,  in  like  manner,  gives  no  note  of  the 
Epistle.  Whereas  Paul  gives  some  indication  of  his  revelations 
in  his  epistles ;  which  revelations,  however,  he  has  not  recorded 
in  writings  by  themselves. 

"  And,  furthermore,  on  the  ground  of  difference  in  diction,  it 
is  possible  to  prove  a  distinction  between  tlie  Gospel  and  Epistle 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Revelation  on  the  otlier.  For  the 
former  are  written,  not  only  without  actual  error  as  regards  their 
Greek,  but  even  with  the  greatest  elegance,  both  in  their  expres- 
sions and  in  their  reasonings,  and  in  the  whole  structure  of  their 
style.  They  are  very  far  from  betraying  any  barbarisms  or 
solecisms  or  vulgarisms  in  their  diction.  For,  as  might  be  pre- 
sumed, the  writer  possessed  the  gift  of  both  kinds  of  discourse, 
the  Lord  having  bestowed  both  these  capacities  upon  him,  viz., 
that  of  knowledge  and  that  of  expression.  Tliat  the  author  of 
the  latter,  however,  saw  a  revelation,  and  received  knowledge 
and  prophecy,  I  do  not  deny.  Only  I  perceive  that  his  dialect 
and  language  are  not  of  the  exact  Greek  type,  and  that  he 
employs  barbarous  idioms,  and  in  some  places  also  solecisms. 
And  I  would  not  have  any  one  suppose  that  I  have  said  these 
things  in  a  spirit  of  ridicule,  for  I  have  done  so  only  with  the 
purpose  of  setting  riglit  this  matter  of  the  dissimilarity  subsisting 
between  these  writings." 

]n  this  long  extract  we  have  an  exanipli^  of  Origin's 
critical  method,  employed  by  a  mind  freer  than  Origen's 
from  inconsistent  prepossessions.  The  teacluu'  who  can 
impress  such  canons  of  discussion  on  his  pupil  cannot  be 
regarded  as  the  exponent  of  an  extinct  erudition. 

The  letters  of  Dionysius  are  characterised  by  the  same 
moderation  of  mind,  and  as  a  rule  by  the  same  clearness  of 

'  Dionysius  is  wronp:  licrc.  The  title  "Word  of  God"  is  ajiplicd  to 
Christ  in  the  Kcvelation,  and  nowhere  else  except  in  the  Gospel  and 
Epistle  of  S.  John. 


DIONYSIUS  THE  GREAT.  529 

exposition.  In  the  Epistle  to  Dionysins  of  Rome  he  vindi- 
cates himself  from  the  charge  of  unorthodoxy,  to  which  his 
warm  defence  of  the  Trinity,  as  he  understood  it,  against 
Sabellius  had  exposed  him.  He  pleads  for  a  fair  construc- 
tion of  his  opinions,  based  not  on  isolated  ex]3ressions  struck 
out  in  the  heat  of  controversy,  but  on  his  deliberate  utter- 
ances conveyed  in  works  devoted  to  calm  exposition.  He 
does  not  address  Dionysius  as  his  superior,  far  less  as  his 
judge,  but  as  a  revered  brother  and  equal,  whose  good 
opinion  he  does  not  wish  to  lose.  To  found  an  argument 
on  this  letter  for  the  Roman  supremacy  is  simply  ridiculous. 
Even  when  sending  authoritative  decisions  to  one  of  his 
own  provincial  bishops  who  had  applied  for  them,  he  is  most 
careful  not  to  thrust  them  upon  him  as  compulsory,  but 
expressly  begs  him  to  weigh  their  merits,  and,  if  he  finds 
anything  objectionable,  to  let  him  know  his  views. 

The  letter  of  most  general  interest  is  that  addressed  to 
Fabius  of  Antioch,  given  in  the  forty-first  and  following 
chapters  of  the  sixth  book  of  Eusebius.  It  contains  a 
graphic  and  touching  narrative  of  the  persecution  under 
Decius.  It  should  be  read  together  with  the  letter  in  answer 
to  Germanus,  preserved  in  the  same  book,i  which  ex^^lains 
his  own  conduct  in  avoiding  persecution,  and  with  that  to  the 
Alexandrians,^  which  describes  the  awful  calamity  of  the 
plague,  and  the  heroic  ministry  of  the  Christians  to  their 
heathen  fellow-sufferers. 

Comparison  with  Cyprian. 

If  Origen  may  be  contrasted  with  Tertullian,  Dionysius 
may  be  equally  contrasted  with  Tertullian's  disciple  Cyprian. 
In  both  cases  the  principles  of  the  master  in  the  field 
of  thought  were  reproduced  by  the  pupil  in  the  field  of 
action. 

Dionysius  and  Cyprian  were  both  well-born,  wealthy,  and 
of  commanding  personal  qualities.  Both  were  great  admini- 
strators in  a  period  of  exceptional  difficulty,  and  both  found 

1  Eus.  H.  E.  vi.  40,  vii.  11.  -  Eus.  H.  E.  vii.  22. 

2  L 


530         ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

themselves  in  opposition  to  the  see  of  Rome.  Both  were 
obliged  to  submit  to  the  harsh  judgment  of  their  contem- 
poraries for  the  enlightened  prudence  with  which  they 
refused  to  grasp  the  privilege  of  martyrdom.  And  yet  both, 
notwithstanding  this  disadvantage,  were  able  to  retain  their 
influence  unimpaired.  Both  were  men  of  affairs  rather  than 
of  speculative  genius,  though  Dionysius  combined  with  prac- 
tical wisdom  a  certain  originality  of  thought  which  Cyprian 
lacked.  Both  were  disposed  to  pass  a  merciful  judgment  on 
the  conduct  of  the  lapsed.  Both  took  the  same  side  on  the 
great  cpiestion  of  heretical  baptism.  Both  showed  the  same 
pure  instinct  of  Christian  heroism  in  preferring  the  inglorious 
risks  of  the  plague  to  the  splendour  of  an  anticipated  mar- 
tyrdom. Both  advanced  by  their  remarkable  letters  the 
growing  organisation  of  the  Church. 

Their  differences  were  no  less  striking  than  their  resem- 
blances. Cyprian's  tone  of  mind  was  arbitrary  though  his 
manner  was  conciliating.  Dionysius  was  disposed  to  under- 
exercise  rather  than  over-exercise  his  prerogative.  Cyprian's 
ideal  was  towards  outward  unity,  enforced  by  exclusion. 
Dionysius,  relying  only  on  discussion,  strove  to  increase  the 
comprehensiveness  of  the  Church.  C}qorian  provoked  enmity 
by  his  conduct :  Dionysius  by  his  opinions.  Cyprian  loved 
official  majorities :  Dionysius  friendly  debates.  Cyprian, 
though  opposed  to  Rome,  is  admitted  by  Rome  herself  to 
be  the  strongest  champion  of  her  claims.  Dionysius  has 
been  gi*anted  indeed  the  honour  of  a  great  name,  but  his 
writings  have  been  allowed  almost  to  perish.  In  Cyprian  we 
see  the  administrative,  hierarchical  manipulation  of  Scripture 
already  in  perfection :  in  Dionj^sius  we  have  the  brilliant 
inauguration  of  a  Scripture  criticism  which,  with  a  few 
partial  revivals,  was  destined  to  slumber  till  reawakened 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  The  one  is  the  type  of  the 
ecclesiastical  statesman:  the  other  of  the  gentler  ''Father 
in  God." 


LATER  ORIGENISTS.  531 


Later  Orig-enists. 

Among  other  Alexandrian  worthies  we  may  mention 
Pierius,  who  filled  the  chair  of  the  Catechetical  school  with 
such  unswerving  adherence  to  what  he  considered  Origen's 
views  as  to  gain  the  honourable  title  of  the  younger  Origen. 
He  was  famous  for  his  allegorical  expositions,  and  wrote 
several  treatises  that  were  extant  in  Jerome's  time.  His 
older  contemporary  Theog^nostus  (circ.  a.d.  260)  was  also  a 
writer  of  mark.  His  seven  books  of  Hypotyposes  (outlines) 
were  in  circulation  two  centuries  after  his  death.  He  was 
charged  with  using  language  of  an  Arianising  tendency  ;  but, 
like  Origen  and  Dionysius,  was  fortunate  enough  to  have 
his  reputation  cleared  by  Athanasius.  The  line  of  bishops 
after  Dionysius  was  continued  by  Maximus  (A..D.  265), 
Theonas  (a.d.  282),  and  Peter  (a.d.  300),  who  in  their 
theological  views  all  represented  the  best  traditions  of  the 
school.  The  troubled  episcopate  of  Peter  closed  with  his 
death  by  martyrdom  under  the  persecution  of  Maximin 
(a.d.  311).  The  edict  of  Diocletian  seven  years  previously 
had  severely  tested  the  fidelity  of  his  flock.  So  many  defec- 
tions had  taken  place  that  Peter  found  it  necessary  to  draw 
up  a  series  of  Canons  of  Reconciliation,  proportioning  various 
penances  to  the  varying  degrees  of  weakness  or  guilt. ^  They 
are  of  great  importance  to  the  student  of  Church  history. 
We  need  do  no  more  than  just  notice  them  here.  The  last, 
as  usually  reckoned,  does  not  belong  to  the  series,  but  is  part 
of  a  pamphlet  on  the  Paschal  Festival.  He  wrote  also  an 
important  work  on  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  of  which  use  was 
made  at  the  Council  of  Ephesus.  Its  title  is  uncertain. 
Leontius  of  Byzantium  refers  to  it  as  the  treatise  "  On  the 
Saviour's  sojourn  amongst  us."  A  name  familiar  to  every 
Church  history  reader  is  that  of  Pamphilus,  presbyter  of 
Caesarea,  the  guide  and  friend  of  Eusebius.  So  greatly  did 
the  great  historian  cherish  his  master's  memory,  that  on  his 
death  by  martyrdom  he  added  the  name  of  Pamphilus  to  his 

^  These  will  be  found  in  Koutb,  HcL  Sacr.,  vol.  iv. 


532 


ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 


own,  and  is  always  known  as  Eusebiiis  Pampliili.  l^amphilns 
was  a  native  of  Tyre,  and  born  in  a  good  position.  This  he 
surrendered  from  a  desire  to  devote  himself  wholly  to  ascetic 
])ractices  and  unremitting  study  of  Scripture.  He  repaired 
to  Alexandria,  where  he  became  a  disciple  of  Pierius.  The 
work  of  his  life  was  the  collection  of  the  famous  library,  of 
whicli  iMisebius  made  such  excellent  use,  and  some  volumes 
of  wliich  Jerome  was  able  to  obtain,  esteeming  them  as  his 
most  precious  possession.  Its  two  most  noteworthy  treasures 
were  the  original  copy  of  Origen's  Hexapla  and  the  Hebrew 
Gospel  which  passed  as  the  original  S.  Matthew.  It  was 
also  rich  in  early  MSS.  of  the  New  Testament,  and  contained 
nearly  all  the  works  of  Origen,  transcribed  by  Pamphilus' 
own  hand.  His  admiration  for  Origen  was  unbounded,  and 
in  the  glowing  pages  of  Eusebius  we  catch  a  reflection  of 
their  joint  estimate  of  the  master.  Thrown  into  prison  on 
the  outbreak  of  the  Diocletian  persecution,  he  devoted  two 
years  to  the  composition  of  an  elaborate  vindication  of 
Origen's  memory,  in  six  books,  five  of  which  he  lived  to 
complete,  while  the  sixth  was  added  after  his  death  by 
fi^usebius.  He  suffered  gloriously  in  309,  and  has  left  us 
the  truly  beautiful  legacy  of  a  spotless  and  devoted  life. 

Lucian  of  Antioch. 

Passing  once  more  to  the  Asiatic  Church,  we  find  some 
names  that  claim  attention.  First,  the  martyr  Lucian,  a 
presbyter  of  Antioch,  whose  brilliant  learning  was  combined 
with  a  certain  doctrinal  unsoundness,  to  the  princi])les  of 
which  the  school  of  Arius  afterwards  appealed.  He  was 
born  at  Samosata  about  a.D.  240,  and  educated  under 
Macarius  at  Edessa.  He  settled  at  Antioch,  while  Paul 
was  bishop,  and,  falling  under  suspicion,  was  separated  from 
the  Church  communion  for  a  considerable  period  (A.D.  265- 
280).  On  his  restoration  he  became,  jointly  with  Dorotheus, 
the  head  of  the  Antiochene  school,  whose  leading  principle 
was  the  literal  interpretation  of  Scripture.  The  greatest 
renown  of  this  school  belongs  to  a  later  epoch  ;  but  Lucian 


LATER  ORIGENISTS.  533 

laid  its  foundations.  His  opinions  were  gradually  modified, 
and  at  his  death  at  Nicomedia,  in  311,  he  had  long  enjoyed 
the  confidence  of  the  Catholic  Church.  His  chief  literary 
work  was  the  revision  of  the  LXX,  which  was  so  well  done 
as  to  receive  the  name  of  the  Vulgate  Version,  and  to  be 
accepted  by  the  churches  of  Constantinople,  Asia  Minor  and 
Antioch.  But  to  students  of  Church  history  he  is  best 
known  as  the  author  of  a  creed  submitted  to  the  Council 
of  Antioch  (a.d.  341),  which  has  been  the  subject  of  mucli 
discussion,  its  language  being  so  nicely  balanced  as  to  admit 
either  of  a  Catholic  or  an  Arian  interpretation. 

Archelaus. 

Archelaus,  Bishop  of  Carchar  in  Mesopotamia,  was  the 
author  of  a  disputation  with  the  heresiarch  Manes  (a.d.  277). 
A  fragment  of  considerable  length  stands  under  his  name, 
but  internal  evidence  shows  that  in  its  present  form  it  is  not 
the  work  of  Archelaus.  He  almost  certainly  wrote  in  Syriac, 
whereas  the  Latin  translation  which  we  possess  is  evidently 
based  on  a  Greek  original.  It  is  highly  interesting  as  pre- 
serving the  Western  tradition  of  the  career  and  doctrines  of 
the  heretic.^ 

Methodius. 

We  conclude  this  chapter  with  a  brief  notice  of  Methodius, 
Bishop  of  Patara  in  Lycia,  or,  according  to  Jerome,  of  Olympus 
and  afterwards  of  Tyre.  Jerome  also  asserts  that  he  suffered 
martyrdom  in  the  Diocletian  persecution,  but  this  statement 
seems  due  to  some  confusion,  as  Eusebius,  who  was  well 
acquainted  with  the  history  of  Methodius,  does  not  mention 
the  fact.  His  literary  activity  was  considerable,  and  his 
works  highly  esteemed.  Of  his  books,  besides  some  frag- 
ments, one  has  come  down  to  us  entire,  the  Symposium,  or 

^  We  have  not  noticed  in  the  text  the  treatise  of  Alexander  of  Lycopolis 
against  Manichajism,  because  it  is  written  from  a  general,  not  a  Christian, 
point  of  view.  Its  author  became  a  Christian  late  in  life.  He  flourished 
early  in  the  fourth  century. 


5.M  ALEXANDRIAN   SCHOOL  OF  THEOLOGY. 

J5  in(|U('t  of  tlie  Ten  A'irgins,  a  dialogue  in  imitation  or  rivalry 
of  riato,  in  wliich  Methodius  gives  the  report  of  a  discussion 
that  took  place  in  the  garden  of  one  Arete,  on  the  subject  of 
chastity.  The  chief  part  of  the  composition  is  occupie'd  with 
ten  prolix  discourses  by  the  virgins  present,  each  taking  one 
aspect  of  the  virtue  as  her  subject,  and  enforcing  its  grandeur 
by  arguments  from  philosophy  or  Scripture.  Those  who 
desire  to  read  it  will  find  it  excellently  translated  in  the 
Ante-Nicene  Library.  To  the  modern  reader,  however,  it  can 
hardly  fail  to  be  wearisome,  and  in  parts  offensive.  From 
several  allusions  to  the  incorrectness  of  alletrorical  exef^esis  ^ 
and  other  debated  matters,  we  gather  that  the  dialogue  had 
Origen  in  view,  and  was  designed  to  counteract  elements  in 
his  teaching  of  which  Methodius  disapproved.  This  was  still 
more  pointedly  the  case  with  the  Dialogue  On  the  Resurrec- 
tion, of  which  large  extracts  are  preserved  by  Epiphanius 
and  Photius.  In  this  he  grappled  with  Origen's  denial  of 
the  materiality  of  the  resurrection  body,  or  rather,  with  the 
(l(Miial  of  its  materiality  which  he  attributed  to  Origen,  and 
which  may  possibly  have  been  held  by  some  of  his  disciples. 
Methodius  has  the  advantage  of  defending  the  orthodox 
position,  and  many  of  his  arguments  are  telling  and  well  put. 

Of  his  other  works  the  fragments  are  extremely  scanty. 
One  was  entitled  0)i  Things  Created  {irepl  rcov  yevrjToyv),  and 
a])p(\irs  also  to  liave  been  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue  and 
directed  against  the  Origenistic  theory  of  an  eternal  creation. 
It  is  possible  that  Methodius  misunderstood  his  opponent's 
l)oint  of  view.  Judging  from  his  extant  dialogue,  we  should 
scarcely  rate  his  intellectual  calibre  highly  enough  to  consider 
him  a  fit  critic  of  Origen's  subtle  and  difficult  ideas. 

Another  important  treatise  mentioned  by  Jerome  was  a 
refutation  of  ]*oii)hyry's  attack  on  Christianity.  Of  all  the 
enemies  of  the  faith,  roii:)hyry  was  held  to  be  the  most 
formidable,  and  two  other  wiiters  of  repute,  Eusebius  and 

'  In  spite  of  this  censure,  he  frequently  adopts  the  same  mctliod  himself. 
Indeed,  it  was  so  universal  that  its  eniploynicnt  by  Methodius  was  unavoid- 
able. Ori.u:en  carried  it  out  consistently  ;  ^lethodius  did  not.  This  was 
the  only  dilTcrcnce. 


LATER  ORIGENISTS.  535 

Apollinaris,  addressed  themselves  to  the  task  of  refuting 
him.  Unfortunately,  both  attack  and  defences  have  perished. 
The  last  writing  of  Methodius  to  which  we  shall  refer  is  a 
Dialogue  on  Freewill,  the  extant  portion  of  which  is  probably 
a  transcript  from  the  work  of  Maximus,  a  much  earlier  writer, 
an  account  of  whom  has  already  been  given. ^  Jerome  and 
others  speak  of  various  works  attributed  to  him  which  are 
now  lost,  and  the  genuineness  of  which  seems  to  have  been 
at  best  doubtful. 

1  See  p.  312. 


BOOK  V. 

LATIN    CHRISTIANITY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

LATIN  THEORY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Hitherto  we  have  been  moving  in  a  Greek  world.  Tlie 
Spirit  of  Jesus  has  spoken  in  the  tongue  of  Plato  and  uti- 
lised his  forms  of  thought.  It  has  reaffirmed  the  principle 
of  Stoicism  that  Deity  indwells  within  the  Universe  and  in 
the  heart  of  man,  has  given  it  a  new  certainty  and  filled  it 
with  a  profounder  meaning.  It  has  admitted  the  claiui  of 
Hellas  to  be  the  trainer  of  man's  intelligence  ^  by  adopting 
her  educational  system  and  consecrating  it  to  the  true  God. 
Thus,  while  insisting  on  the  fact  that  humanity  has  taken  a 
new  departure  through  the  Gospel,  it  has  nevertheless  borne 
witness  to  the  continuity  of  human  progress.  It  has  recog- 
nised the  old  truth,  "  nihil  per  saltum,'"  to  be  applicable  to 
the  spiritual  as  well  as  to  the  physical  world. 

If  we  ask  w^hat  is  the  prevailing  conception  of  the 
Christian  Church  during  this  period,  we  shall  find  it  to 
be  in  conformity  with  the  above-mentioned  fundamental 
ideas.  Though  presented  in  somewhat  vague  outline,  it  is 
unquestionably  presupposed  by  all  the  most  characteristic 
writers.  The  Church  is  conceived  as  a  purely  spiritual 
society,  an  aggregate  of  elect  souls  held  together  by  a 
common  union  with  their  Lord.  This  idea  is  often  overlaid 
with  metaphysical  accretions  or  disguised  by  alien  admixture. 
There  is  perhaps  but  one  writer  who  presents  it  pure  and 
unadulterated,  the  author  of  the  Kpistle  to  Diognetus.  "  Chris- 
tians," he  says,  "stand  to  the  rest  of  mankind  in  the  same 

'  Even  so  far  back  as  the  fifth  century  B.C.,  the  discerning:  mind  of 
Herodotus  saw  this.  'H  'EXXds  omirL  rod  y^uovs  dXXa  t^s  Siavoias  (hai  5oKe7. 
'•  Hellas  is  not  so  much  the  name  of  a  race  as  of  a  state  of  culture." 

539 


540  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

relation  in  whicli  tlic  soul  stands  to  the  body."  ^  Stripped  of 
all  metaphysics,  all  rhetoric,  all  dogma,  this  is  the  essential 
conception  of  the  Church,  which,  struck  out  first  by  S.  Paul, 
flashes  forth  in  Diognetus,  and  descending  through  Justin 
and  Clement,  attains  in  Origen  its  most  elaborate  statement. 
In  order  to  make  it  fully  intelligible,  two  postulates  are 
required.  The  first  is  the  accompaniment  of  a  continuous 
Divine  revelation ;  the  second  is  the  continuous  indwelling 
of  a  Divine  Personality.  Both  these  postulates  are  clearly 
present  to  the  mind  of  S.  Paul,  and  are  apprehended  with 
more  or  less  distinctness  by  all  the  representative  Greek 
theologians,  though  the  inferior  vividness  of  their  spiritual 
intuitions  combines  with  the  complexity  of  their  materials  of 
thought  to  obscure  the  clearness  of  their  apprehension. 

Nevertheless,  taking  a  broad  view  of  the  Greek  Fathers 
down  to  Athanasius,  and  discarding  everything  but  the 
central  principle  of  their  thought,  we  shall  hardly  err  in  pro- 
nouncing them  to  have  held  the  Church  to  be  the  company 
of  all  those  souls  in  whom  the  Divine  Word  was  realised  to 
be  the  energising  power  and  personality  of  their  life,  and  to 
stand  to  the  rest  of  mankind  in  the  same  relation  as  the  soul 
of  man  stands  to  his  body. 

But  from  the  very  commencement  of  Christianity  a  totally 
different  conception  of  the  Church  was  formed — a  conception 
that  allied  itself  with  Jewish  as  the  other  allied  itself  with 
Greek  ideas.- 

Already  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  we  see  the  lines  sketched 
out  on  which  the  so-called  Apostolic  Fathers,  and  especially 
Jlermas,  drew  their  picture  of  a  great  organised  community 
governed  by  divinely-commissioned  delegates,  to  whose  hands 
alone  was  entrusted  the  knowledge  that  was  to  illuminate 
and  the  ordinances  that  were  to  save  mankind.     In  a  word, 

'  The  reader  is  referred  to  IJook  II.,  cha]).  iv.  p.  305,  where  the  whole 
pa.ssa^e  is  translated,  showing  the  working  out  of  the  thouglit. 

-  I  am  in  no  way  questioning  the  directly  Divine  source  of  both  these 
concejjtions  as  revealed  by  Ciirist  to  the  Apostles.  They  arc  in  truth  com- 
plementary to  each  other,  and  in  the  present  disi)cnsation  both  are  equally 
necessary.  They  will  doubtless  be  reconciled  in  a  more  comprehensive 
imity  in  the  world  to  come. 


LATIN  THEORY  OF   THE   CHURCH.  541 

the  Church  from  this  point  of  view  expressed  the  apparatus 
of  salvation,  not  the  fact  of  it.  The  religion  of  Christ 
became  the  New  Covenant,  the  New  Law,  in  which  the  Old 
Covenant  and  the  Old  Law  found  their  fulfilment.  In  Justin 
and  Irena3us  the  two  conceptions  stand  side  by  side.  At  one 
time  they  speak  of  the  Church  as  the  life  of  the  Spirit  in 
man ;  at  another,  as  the  corporate  body  to  which  Christ's 
doctrine  and  sacraments  are  committed  as  a  Divine  trust. 
The  latter  conception,  however,  is  that  to  which  tlieir  spirit 
and  temper  most  inclines,  and  we  rank  them  accordingly 
among  those  that  hold  it. 

But  it  is  not  to  Greek  theologians  that  we  must  look  for 
the  full  development  of  such  an  idea.  This  was  the  special 
work  allotted  by  Divine  Providence  to  the  Latin  Church. 

Nothing  can  bring  more  clearly  home  to  the  thinking 
mind  the  permanence  of  ideas  in  man's  changing  history,  or 
if  we  prefer  so  to  express  it,  the  reign  of  law  in  man's  develop- 
ment, than  the  undoubted  connection  which  exists  between 
Greek  Christianity  and  Greek  philosophy  on  the  one  hand, 
and  between  Roman  Christianity  and  Roman  imperialism  on 
the  other.  This  forms  at  once  the  most  decisive  fact  of 
religious  history  in  the  past,  and  the  most  fertile  source  of 
religious  anticipation  for  the  future. 

From  the  very  first  the  Roman  Church  had  seized,  as  by  a 
creative  intuition,  on  the  idea  of  Order  as  the  basis  of  the 
Universe.  This  forms  the  main  argument  of  Clement's 
Epistle.  The  Order  of  God's  Universe  must  be  reflected  in 
the  Order  of  Christ's  Church :  the  old  Creation  is  to  be  the 
pattern  of  the  new.  But  Christians  are  not  left  to  seek  their 
principles  of  order  from  the  remote  and  inaccessible  analogies 
of  nature.  God  Himself,  in  founding  the  Jewish  Churcli,  has 
drawn  a  picture  for  them,  reduced  to  scale,  ex]3ressly  tliat  they 
may  copy  it.  This  is  the  key  to  the  Christian  position,  and 
by  its  application  the  problem  of  human  destiny  is  solved. 

But  though  Clement  and  his  successors  were  thus  laying- 
the  foundations  of  Latin  Christianity,  it  was  not  by  Roman 
bishops  that  the  superstructure  was  laid.  Incapable  of  ideas 
genuinely   spiritual,  the    Roman    mind    materialised    all    it 


542  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

toucbod.     The  spiritual  presentation  of  the  theory  came  not 
from  Europe,  but  from  Africa. 

In  three  successive  stages,  each  represented  by  a  man  of 
commanding  genius,  the  fabric  of  Latin  Christianity  was 
built  up.     The  first  stage  was  the  laying  of  the  spiritual 

f  foundation;  this  is  represented  by  Tertullian.  The  second 
was  the  raising  of  the  ecclesiastical  framework ;  this  is 
represented  by  Cyprian.  The  third  was  the  consolidation 
and  completion  of  the  entire  edifice ;  this  is  represented  by 
Augustine.  This  pre-eminent  doctor  of  the  Latin  Church, 
who  towers  above  predecessors  and  successors  alike,  stamped 
theology  so  completely  with  his  individual  impress  as  virtu- 
ally to  arrest  its  further  progress ;  so  that  the  teaching  of 
Augustine  and  the  teaching  of  the  Church  have  ever  since 
been  convertible  terms.  As,  however,  he  belongs  to  a  later 
period  than  that  of  our  history,  we  must  pass  him  by  and 
confine  our  criticism  to  the  theories  of  Tertullian  and 
Cyprian. 

I  That  of  Tertullian  is  the  more  original,  and  in  point  of 
precision  has  nivcr  been  sur[3assed.  It  is  contained  in  his 
famous  treatise,  "  On  the  Prescription  of  Heretics."  ^  His 
argument  is  founded  on  the  principles  of  lioman  law,  and  i 
was  exactly  suited  to  the  apprehension  of  the  lioman  mind. 
Christ  has  bequeathed  the  faith  to  the  Church  as  her  property, 
to  be  administered  for  the  salvation  of  mankind.  Her  title- 
deeds  are  the  Scriptures,  guaranteed  by  the  signature  of 
Christ,  and  the  witness  of  the  Apostles.  For  a  long  period 
her  title  has  never  been  disputed,  nor  her  administration 
questioned.  At  length  certain  persons  appear  who  claim  an 
independent  right  to  interpret  Scripture  and  discover  truth 
for  themselves.  Tei-tullian  replies  :  You  have  no  such  right ; 
the  Scripture  is  ours  ;  we  hold  it  by  prescription,  and  we  alone 
have  the  power  to  inteqiret  it.  Truth  is  not  a  thing  to  be 
discovered  by  research.  It  has  been  given  once  and  for  ever. 
Christ  gave  it  to  the  Apostles,  and  they  handed  it  down, 
with  the  key  of  its  meaning,  to  the  churches  they  founded. 
Taught  themselves  by  Christ,  they  took  security  for  the  safe 
^  For  a  further  criticism  of  tliis  treatise,  sec  p.  569. 


LATIN  THEORY  OF  THE   CHURCH.  543 

transmission  of  their  teaching.  That  this  was  done  is  abun- 
dantly proved  by  the  substantial  agreement  of  all  the  Apos- 
tolic Churches  throughout  the  world.  Heresy  is  at  bottom 
nothing  else  but  self-will.  It  is  instigated  by  philosophy,  the 
proud  working  of  the  human  spirit  in  rebellion  against  God. 
Heresy  and  philosophy  speak  in  different  dialects,  but  they 
are  one  and  the  same  thing.  They  can  only  end  in  false- 
hood, for  humanity  is  of  itself  powerless  to  arrive  at  truth. 
The  Divine  society  of  believers,  acting  through  the  apostolic 
sees,  is  truth's  sole  custodian ;  and  every  doctrine  that 
conflicts  with  the  "  Rule  of  Faith  "  ^  of  any  of  these  churches 
stands  self-condemned. 

The  above  train  of  reasoning  obviously  carries  great  weight, 
and  to  the  Roman  Church  has  always  appeared  unanswerable. 
Yet  Tertullian  drifted  away  from  it,  and  that  after  no  long 
interval.  Having  embraced  rigorist  opinions,  and  failed  to 
obtain  a  recognition  for  them  within  the  Church,  he  aban- 
doned his  former  doctrine  and  sought  a  new  basis  of  Church 
'  fellowship  in  the  visible  manifestations  of  the  Spirit.  It 
would  no  doubt  be  unjust  to  appraise  the  value  of  any  argu- 
ment by  the  hold  it  has  upon  the  mind  of  its  propounder. 
No  one,  for  example,  would  depreciate  the  reasoning  of 
Gladstone's  "  Church  and  State  "  because  the  accomplished 
author  of  it  has  changed  his  point  of  view.  Every  argument 
must  stand  or  fall  according  to  its  intrinsic  strength  or  weak- 
ness ;  and  it  must  be  admitted  that  Tertullian's  is  a  strong 
one.  At  the  same  time  it  needed  supplementing,  and  his 
own  bitter  experience  furnished  the  material  required. 

Cyprian's  extraordinarily  able  pamphlet  "  On  the  Unity 
of  the  Church  "  -  marks  a  great  advance  on  the  position  of 
Tertullian.  It  has  well  been  called  the  Charter  of  the  Latin 
Church.  In  Cyprian's  view  the  Church  is  a  visible  society,,' 
radiating  from  a  visible   centre,    which  is  the  Episcopate. 

*  The  ''  Rcrjufa  Fichi,"  on  which  Tertullian  continually  insists,  is,  in  its 
most  authoritative  shape,  the  Creed.  It  means  the  form  of  instruction 
given  to  catechumens.  The  creeds  of  the  difTerent  churches  varied  in 
phraseology,  but  agreed  in  substance. 

■^  See  also  p.  606, 


544  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

lie  conceives  of  the  Episcop;it(3  as  an  organic  whole  com- 
plete in  itself,  everywhere  diffused,  and  endowed  with  the 
Divine  powers  necessary  for  the  salvation  of  men.  It  is 
derived  from  the  Apostles,  who  handed  down  to  those  whom 
they  ordained  as  their  successors  the  power  with  which  Christ 
Himself  had  invested  them,  viz.,  of  transmitting  the  grace  of 
consecration,  by  which  alone  the  means  of  salvation  can  be 
peq^etuated.  By  ordination,  therefore,  a  man  is  made  a 
priest  or  bishop  of  the  whole  Church,  his  acts  being  equally 
valid  everywhere.  The  Church  is  the  Ark  of  Noah,  riding 
safely  on  the  waves  of  the  world,  and  opening  its  doors  to 
all  who  will  conform  to  its  conditions  of  entrance.  Outside 
the  Church  is  no  salvation  ;  but  those  within  its  pale  have 
already  entered  by  anticipation  on  an  assured  inheritance, 
and  can  await  with  tranquil  confidence  the  subsidence  of  the 
waters  and  the  emergence  of  a  renewed  earth. 

It  may  be  remarked  that  this  theory  as  it  stands  implies 
the  salvation  of  all  members  of  the  Church.  Beyond  this 
point  Cyprian  does  not  go,  though  events  were  already 
suggesting  grave  and  anxious  doubts.  The  question  of  the 
forgiveness  of  post-baptismal  sin  had  always  been  a  difficult 
one,  and  it  was  in  Cyprian's  day  complicated  by  the  still  more 
difficult  problem  how  to  deal  with  those  who  had  abjured 
their  faith.  Cyprian  allows  for  the  possibility  of  such  mortal 
sin,  and  lays  down  stringent  regulations  for  guarding  the 
prerogative  of  pardon.  But,  strictly  speaking,  this  is  to  him 
a  question  of  discipline,  not  of  doctrine.  His  theory  requires 
that  all  baptized  Christians  who  do  not  cut  themselves  ofF  from 
their  faith  by  heresy  or  impenitence  should  be  permitted  to 
die  in  the  Church's  grace. 

On  these  two  primary  documents  is  based  the  organisation 
of  th(^  Western  Church.  They  are  unquestionably  the  most 
important  Latin  writings  of  the  Ante-Nicene  period.  They 
deserve  to  be  read  and  re-read  by  all  ecclesiastical  students. 
They  enclose  in  embryo  every  subsequent  development. 
Augustine's  immortal  "  City  of  God  "  is  but  a  sermon  from 
their  text.  His  doctrines  of  predestination,  freewill,  and 
grace,   spring  from  them   as  a  root.     In  them  the  famous 


LATIN  THEORY   OP^  THE   CHURCH.  545 

antithesis  of  Aquinas  between  tlie  kingdoms  of  nature  and 
of  grace  is  already  latent.  The  history  of  the  Papacy  is  but 
one  long  comment  on  them.  From  their  pregnant  pages 
may  be  deduced,  with  spiritual  if  not  logical  consistency,  the 
modern  Anglican  revival  with  all  its  loyalty  to  the  past,  with 
all  its  significance  for  the  future.  The  theology  of  apostolic 
tradition,  as  distinct  from  the  theology  of  sanctified  reason, 
finds  in  them  its  authoritative  and  indispensable  support. 

These  two  writers  alone  occupy  the  first  rank.  It  will  be 
necessary  to  discuss  the  works  of  several  other  apologists; 
but  they  are  of  altogether  secondary  importance.  Minucius, 
Novatian,  Arnobius  and  Lactantius,  have  left  writings  of 
considerable  interest.  But  whatever  their  merits,  they  lie 
outside  that  mighty  stream  of  development,  which,  diverging 
at  its  source  from  that  of  Greek  theology,  was  destined  to 
carry  between  its  banks  the  mind  of  Europe  for  thirteen 
centuries,  to  mix  again  perhaps  with  that  other  ''ancient 
river,"  whose  calmer,  broader  stream  is  also  wending  on 
towards  the  ocean  of  Divine  truth. 


2  M 


CHAPTKU  IL 

THE    AFRICAN    CHURCH-Q.  SEPTIMIUS    FLORENS 
TERTULLIANUS  (a.d.   160-230?). 

S.  Augustine,  with  pardonable  exaggeration,  s])('aks  of  Konie 
and  Carthage  as  the  two  great  nurseries  of  Latin  literature.^ 
.  He  probably  implies  that  what  Rome  achieved  for  profane 
Utters,  Carthage  achieved  for  the  literature  of  the  Church. 
And  even  within  the  ecclesiastical  sphere,  a  comparison  might 
be  drawn  between  the  two  cities  on  almost  equal  terms.  If 
the  world  is  indebted  to  Rome  for  the  organisation  of  the 
Church,  Rome  is  indebted  to  Carthage  for  the  theory  on 
which  that  organisation  is  built. 

The  career  of  Carthage  as  a  Christian  centre  exemplifies 
the  strange  vicissitudes  of  history.  The  city  which  Rome 
in  her  jealousy  had  crushed,  which,  not  content  with  crush- 
ing, she  had  obliterated  from  the  face  of  the  earth,  had  at 
the  bidding  of  Rome's  greatest  son  risen  from  her  ashes, 
and  by  her  career  almost  verified  the  poet's  taunt  that  the 
greatness  of  Carthage  was  reared  on  the  ruin  of  Italy.^  For 
in  truth  the  African  capital  was  in  all  but  political  power  no 
unworthy  rival  of  Rome.  It  had  steadily  grown  in  commercial 
prosperity.  Its  site  was  so  advantageous  as  to  invite,  almost 
to  compel,  the  influx  of  trade,  which  ever  spontaneously 
moves  along  the  line  of  least  resistance.  And  the  people 
were  well  able  to  turn  this  natural  advantage  to  account. 
A  mixed  nationality,  in  which  the  original  Italian  immigra- 
tion lent  a  steadying  force  to  the  native  Punic  and  kindred 

^  "  Diiao  urbc'S  litcranim  I.atiiinnim  artifices  Roma  atque  Carthago."' — 
.?.  Awjustine. 

-  •'  O  magna  Cartliago,  probrosis 
Altior  Italiic  minis  !  " — Horace. 
546 


TERTULLIAN.  547 

African  elements  that  formed  its  basis,  with  its  intelli- 
gence enriched  by  large  accessions  of  Greek  settlers  from 
Gyrene  and  Alexandria — Carthage  had  develojoed  in  the 
second  century  of  our  era  into  a  community  at  once  wealthy, 
enterprising  and  ambitious.  Once  again  she  stood  in  the 
front  rank  of  w^orld-famous  states,  the  acknowledged  leader 
of  a  group  of  vigorous  cities,  which  looked  to  her,  not  indeed 
for  political  supremacy,  but  for  literary  and  philosophical 
inspiration.  Some  of  these  cities  had  even  outstripped  their 
chief  in  the  race  for  fame.  Leptis  had  produced  Annaeus 
Cornutus,  the  genial-minded  Stoic,  master  and  friend  of  ' 
Persius  and  Lucan :  she  had  produced  Septimius  Severn  s, 
the  poet-soldier,  whom  Statius  praises  in  his  brilliant  verse. 
Cirta  had  given  birth  to  Fronto,  Madaura  to  Apuleius,, 
Adrumetum  to  Salvius  Julianus.  These  men  were  not' 
merely  the  idols  of  their  countrymen,  but  stood  on  the 
loftiest  pinnacle  of  glory  in  the  world  of  letters,  were  the 
chosen  friends  of  great  emperors,  and  were  deemed  worthy 
of  filling  offices  of  high  public  trust.  And  all  these  had 
appeared  before  Carthage  had  given  a  single  man  of  the 
first  rank  to  the  world. 

But  the  renown  of  these  cities  gradually  paled  before  the 
rising  brightness  of  the  mother  state.  The  time  had  now 
arrived  when  the  star  of  Carthage  was  once  again  to  rise 
brilliant  upon  the  horizon,  and  to  shine  with  a  lustre  which 
waxed  with  the  ages,  and  can  never  again  grow  dim.  It 
was  no  longer  in  the  sphere  of  profane  literature,  but  in  her 
contributions  to  the  cause  of  Christianity  and  the  spiritual 
armoury  of  the  Church,  that  the  proud  Queen  of  Africa  was 
to  win  her  second  crown  of  fame. 

If  Rome,  in  the  brutal  exercise  of  material  power,  had 
stamped  to  dust  her  rival  in  the  sphere  of  worldly  empire, 
Carthage  by  a  just  retaliation  imposed  on  mankind  the 
terms  on  which  Rome  was  to  rest  her  claims  to  spiritual 
dominion.  It  is  certain  that,  but  for  the  charter  of  legisla- 
tion put  into  her  hands  by  Carthage,  her  spiritual  dominion 
could  not  have  been  so  securely  founded,  while  to  the  lofty 
far-seeing   intelligence  which   framed  that   legislation   she 


548  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

owes  whatever  of  respect  and  voluntary  homage  is  paid  to 
lier  dominion  now.  The  names  of  Tertullian,  Cy]orian  and 
Augustine/  at  once  suggest  the  source  from  whicli  Papal 
Rome  drew  tlic  ])rinciples  of  Church  controversy,  Church 
organisation,  and  Church  doctrine,  which  liave  consolidated 
lier  authority,  and  to  some  extent  justified  her  pretensions  to 
rule  the  conscience  of  Christendom. 

The  history  of  the  Church  of  Africa  is  in  its  origin 
obscure;  but,  at  the  time  when  it  bursts  into  light  in  the 
pages  of  Tertullian,  a  state  of  things  is  revealed  which 
implies  a  long  and  flourisliing  past.  Carthage  could  indeed 
claim  no  apostolic  founder  of  her  faith.  The  authority  of 
an  orierinal  and  unbroken  tradition  was  not  hers.  She  looked 
to  Rome  for  her  rule  of  orthodoxy,  partly  as  being  the  nearest 
Apostolic  Church,  partly  as  embodying  the  fullest  stream  of 
teaching  in  its  descent  from  the  two  chief  Apostles.^  But 
this  quasi-filial  respect  did  not  imply  any  subordination. 
When  Stephanus  tried  to  force  on  the  African  churches  a 
practice  contrary  to  their  immemorial  custom,  the  Bishop  of 
Carthage,  supported  b}^  all  his  comprovincials,  maintained  an 
unflinching  opposition  to  his  claims.  But  as  yet  Carthage 
liad  given  no  leader  to  the  world  of  Christian  thought.  She 
was  content  with  the  more  modest  glory  of  a  flourishing  and 
prosperous  Church,  among  whom  the  seeds  of  enthusiasm, 
kindled  by  occasional  persecutions,  had  borne  some  good 
fruit ;  but  whose  danger  lay  rather  in  too  ready  a  compro- 
mise with  the  customs  of  the  world,  in  a  tendency  to  laxity 
of  manners,  and  to  a  fashionable  crust  of  Christianity  without 
its  s])irit,  which  in  some  cases  went  so  far  as  to  outrage  the 
healthy  common  sense  of  average  men,  and  to  call  impera- 
tively for  reform.^ 

*  S.  Augustine  was  a  native  of  Tagaste  in  Numidia,  and  spent  the  years 
of  his  episcopal  activity  at  Hippo,  But  the  critical  i)eiiod  of  his  intel- 
lectual life  was  passed  at  Carthage  :  and,  in  any  case,  the  influence  of 
Carthage  was  in  his  day  paramount  in  Africa. 

"^  Pranrr.  adv.  Hard,  xxxvi. 

^  As  in  the  custom  alluded  to  by  Cyprian  of  the  Sx'biiitroducta;  or  female 
companions  of  the  clergy. 


TERTULLIAN.  549 


Personality  of  Tertullian. 

Into  this  comiiiiiiiity,  with  its  hixurioiis  religionism,  its 
latent  earnestness,  and  its  serene  self-satisfaction,  the  per- 
sonality of  Tertullian  must  have  fallen  like  a  thunderbolt. 
Who  was  this  man,  who,  to  judge  from  his  writings,  for  we 
know  scarce  anything  of  his  life,  cannot  have  failed  to  awaken 
the  conscience  of  all  who  heard  him  ? 

The  historical  man  is  hidden  from  us,  but  the  essential 
man  is  clearly  enough  discerned.  The  date  of  his  birth  is 
quite  uncertain.  Jerome's  meagre  outline  states  that  he  was 
the  son  of  a  proconsular  centurion,  of  sharj^  and  vehement 
temper,  the  first  Latin  writer  after  Victor  and  Apollonius,  a 
native  of  Carthage ;  who  remained  a  presbyter  of  the  Church 
until  he  had  attained  the  middle  age  of  life,  and  was  driven 
by  the  envy  of  the  Koman  clergy  to  embrace  the  opinions  of 
Montanus,  which  he  calls  the  New  Prophecy  ;  that  he  wTote 
several  books  against  the  Church,  some  of  which  were  lost  at 
an  early  period  ;  that  he  lived  to  extreme  old  age.  Eusebius 
adds  that  he  was  accurately  acquainted  with  Eoman  law,  and 
in  other  respects  distinguished  and  in  great  repute  at  Rome. 
A  late  author  adds  that  he  practised  rhetoric  for  many  years, 
which  is  extremely  probable,  for  rhetoric  was  essential  to  the 
success  of  an  advocate,  a  calling  which  in  his  pagan  days  he 
undoubtedly  followed.  We  learn  from  his  own  writings  that 
he  was  a  convert  from  heathenism,  and  had  lived  in  the 
usual  heathen  sins,  despising  Christ  and  His  professors.  His 
conversion  took  place  probably  in  early  middle  life,  in  the 
full  plenitude  of  liis  powers  ;  he  was  married,  and  in  the 
interval,  no  long  one  apparently,  between  his  conversion  and 
secession,  was  admitted  to  the  priesthood.  The  date  of  his 
conversion  is  given  approximately  as  A.D.  192.^  U  so,  his 
continuance  in  the  Church  must  be  limited  to  at  most  eight 
years,  as  in  201  it  seems  certain  that  he  was  a  Montanist.  ^ 
His  life  was  i^roloiigi^d  through  the  reign  of  Elagabalus 
(218-222),  most  probably  far  into  that  of  Severiis  (222-235), 

^  Pusey  places  it  as  late  as  196. 


550  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

whose  edict,  allowing  the  existence  of  the  Christian  religion, 
he  may  have  just  lived  to  see. 

From  the  above  scanty  details  it  is  vain  to  attempt  any 
sketch  of  the  progress  of  Tertullian's  mind.  All  we  can  do 
is,  by  conjecture,  and  by  piecing  together  allusions  scattered 
through  his  works,  to  picture  to  ourselves  the  influences  that 
surrounded  his  younger  and  maturer  years,  and  assisted  the 
development  of  his  singularly  independent  genius.  The 
Latin  language  had  become,  we  know  not  whether  by  an  act 
of  authority,  the  language  of  Provincial  Africa.  No  language 
could  be  less  suited  to  the  ardent  and  yet  subtle  nature 
of  these  mixed  races.  The  habitual  caution  and  studied 
reserve  of  its  idiom  was  the  result  of  centuries  of  diplomacy 
and  public  administration.  Its  total  inadequacy  for  meta- 
physical exactness  was  not  more  obvious  than  its  unsuitable- 
ness  for  the  exaltation  of  relierious  zeal.  The  Carthaofinian, 
like  the  Syrian,  could  readily  express  his  thoughts  in  Greek  ; 
but  the  effort  to  think  in  Latin  must  have  been  enormous. 
It  is  not  surprising  that  no  Father  had  arisen  whose  command 
of  it  was  equal  to  the  task  of  controversial  disputation.  But 
the  brilliant  heathen  writers  who  were  Tertullian's  earlier 
contemporaries  had  done  much  to  bridge  over  this  difficulty. 
And  to  the  study  of  their  writings  we  can  imagine  him 
devoting  all  the  fresh  powers  of  his  vigorous  mind.  That 
his  education  had  been  coextensive  with  the  circle  of 
rhetorical  culture  then  in  vo^ue  is  clear,  from  the  varied 
erudition  abundantly  displayed  in  his  works.  He  was  able 
to  write  fluently  in  Greek,  and  alludes  to  Greek  recensions 
of  several  of  his  treatises.  But  with  the  natural  ambition  of 
gaining  the  ear  of  the  Western  world,  and  with  a  wise  com- 
prehension of  the  superiority  of  the  vernacular  to  any  other 
medium,  he  addressed  liimself  to  the  hitherto  unattempted 
problem  of  expounding  the  ideas  of  Christianity  in  a  Latin 
dress.i     The  magnitude  of  the  task  is  the  measure  of  his 

'  Sonic  critics  have  placed  Minucius  P'elix  before  Tertullian  in  point  of 
date.  The  present  writer  does  not  share  this  view.  And  even  if  it  be 
admitted,  the  statement  in  tlie  text  is  not  invalidated,  for  Minucius  does 
not  attempt  to  use  the  theol()<::ical  dialect  peculiar  to  Christianity,  but 
retains  tlie  classical  vocabulary. 


TERTULLIAN.  551 

capacity.  The  vocabulary  of  ecclesiastical  theology,  like  a 
new  and  higher  Minerva,  springs  forth  full-grown  from  his 
brain.  Scarce  a  shade  of  distinction,  metaphysical  or  reli- 
gious, exists  but  he  strives  to  represent  it ;  and  so  well  has  he 
performed  his  task  that  his  writings  have  ever  remained  the 
great  original  repertory  of  Latin  theology,  on  which  that  of 
Augustine,  and  through  him  of  the  whole  lloman  Church,  is 
ultimately  based. 

The  cast  of  his  mind  is  eminently  rhetorical  and  argumen- 
tative. His  natural  eloquence  is  somewhat  fierce  and  rude, 
and  exults  in  drawing  pictures  of  terror ;  his  reasoning  is 
trenchant,  full  and  yet  compressed  ;  but  it  is  the  reasoning 
of  the  advocate,  not  of  the  philosopher.  Though  trained  in 
the  schools,  and  profoundly  influenced  by  many  systems, 
J  especially  those  of  Plato  and  the  Stoics,  he  is  entirely 
devoid  of  the  supreme  quality  of  the  philosopher,  the  patient 
searching  after  truth.  For  him  truth  is  already  found,  and 
discovery  is  a  fruitless  quest.  It  would  be  highly  interesting 
to  inquire  what  was  his  attitude  to  the  heathen  religion  in 
his  pagan  days,  but  as  we  have  no  data  to  guide  us,  it  is 
useless  to  speculate.  One  thing  is  certain.  Unlike  Justin, 
Clement  and  Minucius,  he  broke  altogether  with  his  intel- 
lectual past.  Whether  he  had  been  a  believer  in  heathenism 
or  a  mere  outward  conformist,  he  cast  it  aside  once  and  for 
ever.  In  his  unqualified  condemnation  of  all  the  efforts  of 
the  human  mind  to  attain  to  truth,  he  recalls  Tatian  far 
more  than  Justin,  or  even  Cyprian.  His  immense  stores  of 
culture  are  used  solely  for  controversial  purposes  :  even  when 
citing  instances  of  lofty  heathen  virtue  to  shame  Christian 
professors,  he  ascribes  them  to  the  envy  of  the  devil,  who  tries 
every  shift  to  secure  his  empire  over  souls.  He  assumes 
that  irreconcilable  attitude  towards  mere  human  culture 
which  the  Papacy,  borrowing  from  him,  has  consistently 
maintained,  and  wields  as  its  most  telling  weapon  at  the 
present  day. 

His  most  striking  characteristics  are  tlioroughness  and 
vigour.  He  gives  no  quarter  :  he  strikes  with  the  full  force 
of  an  ungloved  and  muscular  hand.     But  his  thoroughness  is 


( 


552  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

maintained  at  the  cost  of  eccentricity  ;  and  his  vigour  degene- 
I'ates  into  brutal  vehemence.  In  the  refinement  of  mind  for 
wliicii  Cyprian  and  Augustine  are  so  conspicuous,  he  is  wholly 
deficient.  He  has  neither  the  sense  of  propriety  to  know 
when  he  has  said  enough  (which  makes  many  of  his  argu- 
ments tediously  prolix),  nor  the  considerateness  to  avoid 
crushing  a  fallen  antagonist.  J  lis  eagerness  in  the  moment 
of  victory  betrays  him  into  strains  of  coarse  exultation,  and 
his  praises  of  virtue  are  marred  by  repulsive  caricatures  of 
vice.  No  great  writer  offends  so  often  against  good  taste, 
and  yet  no  writer  who  so  often  offends  against  good  taste  is 
so  truly  great.  His  style  is  himself.  Carried  away  by  the 
ardour  of  a  vivid  yet  turbid  and  narrow  imagination,  he 
bristles  with  condensed  phrases  of  more  than  poetic  intensity  ; 
and  some  of  them  have  passed  into  the  proverbial  lore  of 
the  Church.^ 

His  pregnant  epigrams  -  reveal  a  new  power  of  the  Latin 
language,  the  vocabulary  of  which  he  has  enriched  by  hundreds 
of  new  and  striking  combinations.  His  fertility  in  this  respect 
is  unexampled  among  Christian  writers,  but  is  to  some  extent 
]mralleled  by  his  heathen  contemporary  Apuleius.  One  char- 
acteristic of  his  style  is  a  fondness  for  archaisms,  which  was 
a  fashion  of  his  day. 

His  difliculty  is  well  known.  In  this  respect  he  stands 
l)re-eminent  among  Latin  writers,  heathen  or  Christian.  S. 
Augustine  is  perhaps  the  nearest  to  him,  but  even  his  involved 
clauses  give  place  to  the  riddling  brevity  of  Tertullian.  As 
a  rule,  his  speculative  treatises  are  easier  reading  than  his 
moral  ])auiphlets.  The  loug  and  elaborate  argument  against 
Marcioii  is  ])erhaps  the  most  clearly  written  of  all  his  works  ; 
as  the  justly  celebrated  Apology  is  the  most  brilliant,  and 
the  short  treatise  on  the  Witness  of  the  Soul  the  most  acute 
and  original. 

'  Especially  the  beamirul  savin«:,  "The  blood  (ol  ^Martyrs)  is  the  seed 
of  the  Church  ;  "  "  Christians  are  made,  not  born  ;  "  "  Truth  is  the  eldest 
of  things." 

-  The  reader  is  referred  especially  to  the  beginning  of  the  treatise 
Ih  Moivxjumio,  and  to  the  list  of  Philosophical  schools  in  the  De  Anima. 


J 


TERTULLIAN.  553 

From  a  mind  coustituted  like  his  it  would  be  vain  to  expect 
a  sympathetic  or  appreciative  treatment  of  opponents.  The 
charity  which  illumines  the  controversial  writings  of  Justin 
and  Origen  is  unknown  to  Tertullian.  He  is  as  incapable  of 
doing  justice  to  an  adversary's  point  of  view  as  he  is  supremely 
successful  in  demolishing  it.  Whether  it  be  the  injustice  of 
the  authorities  against  which  he  pleads,  or  the  aberrations 
of  heretics  which  he  controverts,  or  the  laxity  of  indulgent 
Catholics  which  he  stigmatises,  the  lash  of  scorn,  the  pride 
of  assured  superiority-,  the  rigour  of  the  logician,  are  ever 
in  exercise.  Incapable  of  half  measures,  stern  to  himself 
as  to  others,  inexorable  in  his  demand  for  consistency,  he 
loses  by  vehemence  what  he  gains  by  argumentative  power, 
and,  as  we  shall  see,  died  a  separatist  from  the  communion 
of  the  Church  he  had  striven  so  mightily  to  serve. 

But  these  grave  defects  are  more  than  balanced  by  signal 
virtues  both  of  the  writer  and  of  the  man.  In  the  first  place, 
he  is  conscious  of  his  faults.  He  often  alludes  with  pain 
to  his  errors,  past  and  present.  His  impatient  temper  was  a 
special  source  of  regret,  and  he  bewails  it  in  one  of  the 
noblest  bursts  of  self-reproach  which  have  ever  been  uttered.^ 
There  is  not  one  false  ring  in  all  his  works.  Such  as  he  was 
he  displays  himself  to  us.  We  cannot  indeed  love  him,  but 
he  compels  our  respect.  The  sourness  and  austerity  which 
were  perhaps  the  necessary  reaction  from  a  licentious  youth, 
belong  also  to  the  nature  of  the  man.  He  would  not,  for 
instance,  profess  to  fast  without  undergoing  real  hunger. 
He  would  not  embrace  a  life  of  purity  except  at  the  cost  of 
painful  self-sacrifice.  The  idea  that  holiness  is  compatible 
with  the  maximum  of  innocent  self-indulgence  (so  dear  to 
the  British  Philistine)  was  simply  hateful  to  him.  So  it  was 
with  his  doctrinal  beliefs.  The  ap])roaching  end  of  the  world 
was  with  him  no  liollow  convention;   it  was  a  ]iotent  factor 

^  ''  In  like  luannor,  I,  wretched  man  that  I  am,  ever  sick  witli  the  fever 
of  impatience,  must  needs  sigh  for  and  call  upon  and  speak  all  my  thoughts 
upon  that  healthy  state  of  patience  whicli  I  possess  not,  when  I  call  to 
mind  and  in  the  contemplation  of  my  own  weakness  ruminate  on  the 
thought,  that  the  good  healtli  of  fait  hand  soundness  in  the  Lord's  religion 
do  not  easily  result  to  any  one,  unless  patience  sits  at  his  side  "  (Ik  Pat.  !.). 


554  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

in  his  life.  The  eternal  punishment  of  sin  was  for  him  no 
barren  dogma,  but  an  ever-present  goad  to  right eousuess.  If 
his  Christianity  was  imperfect,  it  was  unmistakably  genuine ; 
neither  resen'e  nor  compromise  clouded  the  reality  of  his 
confession  of  faith.  And  even  in  error  his  sincerity  is  most 
touching.  But  his  error  was  of  discipline,  not  of  faith ;  it 
estranged  him,  indeed,  from  the  company  of  the  orthodox, 
but  no  Father  is  more  free  from  heresy.  As  a  champion 
of  Christian  doctrine  he  stands  second  to  none.  On  all  the 
cardinal  points  he  is  not  only  at  one  with  the  Catholic  view, 
but  his  statements  of  it  are  as  accurate  as  those  of  any 
other  Ante-Nicene  writer.  He  allowed  his  speculative  faculty 
the  least  possible  licence.  In  this  respect  he  compares  favour- 
ably with  the  Alexandrian  theologians.  He  cast  and  recast 
the  fundamental  doctrines  in  the  fire  of  his  thought  till  he 
was  able  to  state  them  with  the  utmost  possible  precision. 
In  this  respect  he  is  far  superior  to  Justin,  and  deeper, 
though  not  more  accurate,  than  Irena-us. 

His  greatest  merit  of  all  is  the  intense  personal  fervour  he 
throws  into  his  arguments,  and  this  is  what  makes  him  as  an 
apologist  supreme.  Beliefs  are  not  matter  for  mere  discussion, 
but  must  be  fought  for  as  one  fights  for  one's  life.  The  metho- 
dical argumentativeness  of  Irenreus,  the  enlightened  reason- 
ableness of  Clement,  pale  before  the  fier}'  heat  of  TertuUian. 
When  the  labour  of  mastering  his  style  has  been  surmounted, 
the  ]X)wer  of  his  eloquence  makes  itself  felt.  And  this 
elof|uence  never  slips  away  from  the  control  of  revealed  truth. 
It  oversteps  the  limits  of  moral  wisdom,  of  good  taste,  of 
decency,  but  of  Catholic  tradition  never.  In  a  few  points 
he  deviates  from  strict  ortliodoxy,  as  in  assigning  a  body  to 
God  and  to  the  soul,  in  speaking  of  the  Logos  as  created, 
in  his  hypothesis  of  the  transmission  of  souls  ;  but  some  of 
these  eccentricities  are  explained  by  his  early  date,  others 
by  his  innate  incapacity  to  attain  to  abstract  spirituality  of 
conception.  Even  Augustine  admits  that  they  do  not  inter- 
fere with  the  general  correctness  of  his  teaching — a  correctness 
far  from  easy  to  maintain  amid  so  great  a  variety  of  subjects, 
and  such  constant  temptation  to  forsake  it. 


TERTULLIAN.  555 

TertuUian  and  Montanism. 

It  is  uncertain  at  what  period  of  his  litV'  TertuUian  became 
affected  by  the  tenets  of  Montanism.  S.  Jerome's  language 
implies  that  he  was  past  middle  age ;  the  cause  he  ascribes 
to  the  jealousy  of  the  Koman  clergy.  It  is  possible  tliat  the 
clergy,  whether  of  Home  or  of  Carthage,  may  have  found  it 
hard  to  understand,  and  harder  to  sympathise  with,  the  rapid 
movements  of  so  restless  a  mind ;  and  as  the  most  uncom- 
mon natures  are  often  the  most  sensitive,  it  may  well  be  that 
TertuUian  felt  himself  slighted  and  misunderstood.^  But  the 
true  reason  lay  deeper  than  this.  It  was  grounded  in  an 
affinity  between  his  spirit  and  that  of  the  founder  of  the  New 
Prophecy.  This  may  be  allowed  without  at  all  implying  that 
the  two  men  were  on  the  same  level  either  of  moral  goodness 
or  of  intellectual  power. 

Montanus,  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  was  in  no  sense  a 
great  man ;  but,  like  all  enthusiasts,  he  had  the  faculty  of 
attracting  minds  superior  to  his  own.  Tertullian's  impulse 
/  towards  an  ascetic  rigorism  which  the  bishops  were  too  wise 
to  encourage,  drew  him  towards  this  teacher  of  a  remote  and 
more  impressionable  region.  It  was  in  Phrygia,  once  the 
home  of  orgiastic  superstitions,  now  the  cradle  of  chiliastic 
dreams,  that  the  new  force  so  hurtful  to  the  Church's  peace 
had  arisen.  In  a  country  where  the  convulsions  of  nature 
found  a  parallel  in  scarcely  less  frequent  or  less  violent 
religious  shocks,  men  were  predisposed  to  welcome  a  system 
that  promised  to  revive  the  unearthly  splendours  of  the 
Christian  dawn.  Instead  of  the  dull  round  of  ecclesiastical 
functions,  they  were  offered  the  excitements  of  a  free  and 
living  inspiration.  The  supernatural  once  more  occupied  the 
foreground :  a  dead  mechanical  routine  was  superseded  by 
the  living   transports    of   ecstasy;    weak    women    were    the 

'  We  have  had  occasion  to  notice  tlie  intolerance  on  tlic  part  of  the 
Roman  clergy  of  any  strongly-marked  individuality  of  character,  and  still 
more,  of  opinions.  TertuUian  fared  as  Hii)polytus  and  Maroion  had 
fared  before  him,  and  as  Origcn  jjrobably  and  Jerome  certainly  fared 
after  him. 


556  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

chosen  veliiclos  of  celestial  warnings,  of  mysterious  visions ; 
prophecies  of  coming  woe,  arising  none  knew  whence,  dis- 
turbed even  the  careless,  and  caused  the  pulse  of  faith  to 
beat  high.  Far  beyond  its  original  birthplace  the  contagion 
spread;  the  world  and  its  pleasures  lost  their  hold ;  gloomy 
views  of  life,  and  of  God's  providence,  prevailed.  One  of 
the  most  striking  testimonies  to  the  reality  of  the  s])iritual 
impression  was  the  eager  thirst  for  martyrdom  that  animated 
these  sectaries :  in  many  quarters  the  end  of  the  world  was 
fully  believed  to  be  at  hand. 

To  certain  minds  there  is  an  irresistible  fascination  in 
revivalism.  It  is  a  comfort  to  see  and  feel  that  God  is  in 
the  midst  of  us,  that  He  works  visibly  among  us,  and  gives 
daily  tokens  which  cannot  be  denied.  The  weary  task  of 
patience  seems  shortened ;  special  providences  are  in  the 
air ;  the  soul's  pulse  is  quickened ;  men  breathe  as  it  were 
the  oxygen  of  mountain  heights. 

To  TertuUian  it  did  not  seem  absurd  thatMontanus  should 
surrender  himself  as  a  passive  instrument  to  be  played  on  by 
the  Holy  Ghost :  that  Prisca  and  Maximilla  should  suddenly 
emerge  from  darkness,  endowed  with  the  prophetic  gift. 
Where  calmer  spirits  inquired  into  the  circumstances  of  their 
lives,  their  character,  the  truth  of  their  predictions,  and  found 
little  to  reassure  them  in  any  of  these,  Tertulliau,  leaping 
such  difficulties  at  a  bound,  thought  he  saw  in  the  move- 
ment the  ideal  he  had  long  been  dreaming  of,  the  Spiritual 
Church,  the  white-robed  company  of  the  elect,  the  royal 
priesthood  of  true  believers.  There  was  much  in  the  con- 
dition of  Carthaginian  Christianity  to  excuse  his  aberration. 
The  standard  of  holiness  had  sunk  very  low.  Worldliness 
was  rampant  among  those  who  should  have  set  an  example 
of  self-denial.  The  effeminate  luxury  of  the  ])riesthood 
excited  his  daily  scorn  :  the  love  of  dress  had  made  the 
very  Virgins  of  the  Church  \  ic  with  llieir  heatlien  sisters  in 
each  art  that  could  captivate  the  eye  of  man.  Kven  the  veil, 
that  immemorial  badge  of  maiden  modi'sty,  was  discarded. 
Christian  men  and  women  frequented  the  public  shows, 
those  vih^   nurseries  of  profligacy  and   cruelty.      It   seemed 


TERTULLIAN.  557 

as  if  the  Church  had  striven  to  quench  the  Spirit,  and  the 
Spirit,  affronted,  had  deserted  the  Church. 

The  stem  nature  of  Tertullian  haik^d  a  doctrine  which,  by 
acknowledging  a  present  Deity,  compelled  a  severer  disci- 
pline.    He  accepted  Montanus'  announcement  of  the  dispen- 
sation of  the  Paraclete,  and  with  it  denied  the  finality  of  the 
apostolic  revelation.     But  this  denial  has  for  him  its  limits. 
He  does  not  profess  to  supersede  the  doctrines  of  the  New 
Testament,  but  only  to  renew  and  enlarge  its  provisions  for 
the  spiritual  life  of  the  Church.     He  founds  his  view  on  the 
words  of  Christ,  "  I  have  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but 
ye  cannot  bear  them  now."     He  regarded  his  own  time  as 
the  first  of  a  series  of  epochs  of  Divine  outpouring,  which 
should  continue  from  time  to  time  to  regenerate  Christian 
society.     But  this  attitude  led  him  to  a  narrow  and  unscrip- 
tural   exclusiveness.     He   learned  to   speak   of  himself  and 
those  who  held  with  him  as  the  spiritual  {Spiritales),  and  the 
rest  of  the   Christian  body  as  the  carnal   [Psychici).     His 
rigorism  was  especially  displayed  in  his  theory  of  marriage 
and  of  meats  and  drinks.     In  his  tract  on  Monogamy  {dc 
Monogainia)  he  lays  down  that  marriage  is  the  eternal  union 
of  two  spirits  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  flesh  ;  from 
which   he   draws   the    conclusion   that    a    second    marriage 
is   in   all    cases   inadmissible,   and  speaks  of  Hermas,  who 
will  not  venture  to  condemn   such  unions,  as  the  shepherd 
of  adulterers.     In  his  treatise  on  Fasting  {de  Jejuniis)  he 
asserts  the   absolute  obligation  of  fixed  abstinences  {stati- 
ones),    and    lays  down   the    additional    principle   of  partial 
fastings    (xcrojyhaf/iae).      The   doctrine   of   baptismal  grace, 
as  now  held  by  him,  was  put  forward  in  its  sternest  form. 
According   to    him,   the    remission   of   sins   in  that    sacra- 
ment was  a  Divine  act  performed  once  for  all,  so  that  the 
promises  of  forgiveness  were  not  to  be  extended  to  such  as 
sinned  wilfully  after  baptism.     In  answer  to  the  question, 
Why,  then,  does  Holy  Scripture  hold  out  the  efficacy  of  the 
Blood  of  Christ  as  an  atonement  for  all  sin  ?  h«-  replies,  Th<' 
Scripture  gives  no  promise  of  a  second  absolution.     It  is.  no 
doubt,  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  warn  those  who  have  fallen. 


558  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

to  exhort  them  to  repentance,  in  tlie  liope  tliat  the  Divine 
mercy  may  be  extenclfd  to  them ;  but  she  has  no  warrant 
for  receiving  them  again  within  lier  pale,  or  for  assuring 
them  of  their  acceptance  witli  God.  80  uncompromising  is 
he  on  tliis  point  tliat,  altliough  he  exalts  the  martyr  as  the 
most  perfect  of  Christ's  servants,  he  yet  refuses  to  him  the 
privilege,  then  universally  recognised,  of  interceding  with 
the  Church  for  post-baptismal  transgressors. 

In  all  these  declensions  from  Catholic  doctrine  we  may 
trace,  as  the  originating  cause,  a  genuine  overmastering 
desire  to  realise  the  conception  of  the  new  birth.  Tertullian 
united  with  a  fervid,  sensuous  imagination  a  profound  vein 
of  speculative  thought,  which  had  never  been  thoroughly 
disciplined  by  the  training  of  philosophy,  and  so  resisted  his 
control.  But,  though  he  swerved  to  some  extent  from  the 
true  Catholic  tradition,  it  would  be  unjust  to  class  him  with 
heretical  teachers,  or  even  with  schismatics.  His  heart  and 
soul,  it  is  impossible  to  doubt,  were  loyal  to  Christ.  He 
judges  himself  from  the  standpoint  of  the  converted  man, 
one  whom  Christ  has  redeemed  for  Himself,  and  to  whose 
renewed  nature  He  has  the  sole  claim.  And,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  his  Montanistic  tenets  have  not  been  without  an 
effect  upon  the  Church.  Though  exaggerated,  and  obtruded 
with  ill-balanced  zeal,  thev  contain  fferms  which  have  been 
transplanted  into  orthodox  soil  and  there  borne  fruit. 

The  ground-principle  of  them  all,  viz.,  the  conflict  between 
the  natural  and  the  supernatural,  and  the  superior  might  of 
the  latter,  undoubtedly  needed  to  be  reasserted  when  Tertul- 
lian wrote;  and  it  has  gradually  wrought  itself  out  in  the 
Christian  commonwealth  through  the  leavening  of  human 
society  by  Christian  ideas,  less  manifestly,  less  strikingly, 
than  Tertullian  in  his  impatience  desired,  but  more  surely, 
more  solidly,  and  not  less  convincingly.  It  has  ever  been 
man's  weakness  to  be  unable  to  leave  to  the  Divine  Master 
the  choice  of  His  own  method  of  carrying  out  His  will.  If 
the  gradual  perception  that  the  Church's  work  among  men 
ought  to  be  confined  to  things  moral  and  spiritual  has  grown 
clearer  with  the  ages;  if  the  pressure  of  public  opinion  has 


TERTULLIAN.  559 

exacted  a  higher  ideal  of  renunciation  among  those  who 
profess  tlie  faith  of  Christ ;  if  the  frank  adoption  of  each 
great  discovery  in  the  realm  of  natural  truth  is  combined 
with  its  due  subordination  to  the  supreme  truths  of  revela- 
tion ;  if  the  spiritual  freedom  of  the  Gospel  is  acknow- 
ledged to  be  the  indispensable  companion  of  the  spread  of 
civilisation ;  the  reflecting  mind  will  see  in  all  these  things 
no  slight  proofs  of  the  principle  for  which  Tertullian  strove, 
only  carried  out  on  a  vaster  scale,  and  amid  the  infinite  long- 
suffering  of  that  righteous  Arbiter,  who  is  strong  and  patient, 
and  endures  to  be  provoked  every  day.  Moreover,  within  ^ 
the  strictly  ecclesiastical  sphere,  the  views  of  Tertullian,  ^ 
pruned  of  their  extravagance,  have  met  with  considerable 
recognition.  His  strong  conviction  of  the  prophetical  office 
of  the  Church  is  now  almost  a  commonplace.  His  intense 
belief  in  the  living  presence  of  the  Spirit  has  long  been 
incorporated  into  the  Church's  faith  through  the  sober 
medium  of  her  councils  and  recognised  teachers.  The 
kernel  of  truth  in  his  theory  of  marriage  has  been  empha- 
sised by  the  sacramental  or  quasi-sacramental  character  that 
Catholic  Christianity  has  always  attached  to  it.  The  distinc- 
tion so  dear  to  him  between  spiritual  and  carnal  Christians 
has  been  retained  in  the  great  conception  of  the  visible 
and  invisible  churches,  while  its  offensive  and  self-riofhteous 
assumption  of  judicial  powers  has  been  avoided.  While 
therefore  we  recognise  the  justice  of  refusing  this  great 
Father  the  highest  title  of  sainthood,  which  is  reserved  for 
such  as  combined  special  holiness  with  submission  to  the 
Church's  authority,  we  may  nevertheless  admit  that  even 
his  errors  have  been  of  use  to  the  Church,  and  may  look 
with  admiration  upon  the  single-minded  devotion  to  what 
seemed  to  him  to  be  truth,  which,  whether  in  orthodox  or 
schismatic,  is  perhaps  the  most  inspiring  spectacle  which 
Christian  history  presents. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THRTLLLIAX  CONTINUED  :—IIIS   WRITINGS. 

In  considering  Tertiillian's  works,  it  is  usual  to  divide  them 
into  Orthodox  and  Montanist.  As  a  matter  of  fact  this 
difference  is  not  always  apparent.  Some  of  his  earliest 
writings  give  promise  by  their  violence  of  the  one-sided 
development  that  was  to  follow ;  while  some  of  his  latest 
works,  and  notably  the  ad  Scapulam,  are  quite  free  from 
objectionable  elements. 

We  shall  consider  briefly  the  following  groups  of  writings, 
(rt)  Apologetic  and  Controversial ;  (h)  Doctrinal  and  Philo- 
sophical ;  {(■)  Practical, — without  reference  to  the  ques- 
tion of  Orthodoxy.  The  reader  is  referred  to  the  list  in  the 
footnote  for  a  discrimination  between  the  two  periods  of  his 
theological  development.^ 

His  Apologetic  Writings. 

These  are  the  most  forcible  and  original  of  all  the  products 
of  his  mind.  Two  of  them  at  least  have  never  been  excelled, 
if  efjualled,  in  the  Clnirch.     Tlieir  tone  of  righteous  anger 

'  The  writer  in  Sniitir.s  Diuirraphical  Dictionary  thus  catalogues  them  : — 

1.  Orthodox  writings,  written  wliile  still  a  member  of  the  Church 
(c.  A. D.  197-200).  (rt)  Apologetic — ad  Martvres,  Apologcticum,  de  Testi- 
raonio  Animie,  ad  Nationes,  advcrsus  Judajos.  (b)  Non-apologetic — de 
Oratione,  de  l}a])tismo,  de  Poenitcntia.  de  Spectaculis,  de  Cultu  Foniinarum 
i.,  de  Idololatria,  de  Cultu  Feminarum  ii.,  de  Patientia,  ad  Uxoreni  i.  and 
ii.,  de  Pnoscriptione  Hitroticorum. 

2.  Montanistic  writings  (c.  AD.  202-223?).  {a)  Dcfi>nding  the  Church 
and  her  teaching — de  Corona  Militis,  de  Fuga  in  Pcrsecutione,  de 
Kxhortatione  Castitatis.  {h)  Defending  the  Paraclete  and  liis  discipline — 
(ie  Virginibus  Volandis  (a  transition  work),  adv.  Marcionem  i.-v.,  adv. 
Herraogenem,  adv.  Valentinianos,  de  Carne  Christi,  de  Hesurrcctione 
(amis,  de  Pallio,  de  Anima,  Scorpiacc,  ad  Scapulam,  de  Monogamin,  de 
.Jijunio,  de  Pudicitia,  adv.  Praxean,  also  the  lost  treatise,  de  Censu  Anima\ 

560 


TERTULLIAN.  561 

points  to  a  time  of  persecution.  The  apologist  speaks  with 
the  sword  hanging  over  him.  Tertullian,  like  Justin,  is  fully 
conscious  of  the  risk  he  runs,  but  his  sterner  temper  is  moved 
to  indignant  remonstrance  where  the  sweet  reasonableness 
of  Justin  is  content  with  mild  ex^DOstulation.  Yet  it  seems 
as  if  the  lapse  of  years  or  the  lessons  of  Christian  experience 
were  not  without  their  effect  on  his  mind,  for  the  Address  to 
Scapula,  written  twelve  or  thirteen  years  after  the  Apology, 
while  it  traverses  the  same  ground,  assumes  a  far  gentler 
and  more  gracious  tone.  It  testifies  to  the  frequent  inter- 
position of  the  magistrate  to  prevent  or  counteract  the  fury 
of  the  multitude.  We  cannot  doubt  that  to  the  humanity  of 
those  in  ofiice  were  to  a  large  extent  due  the  long  periods 
of  rest  which  the  churches  of  Africa  enjoyed.  Tertullian 
indeed  misconstrues  their  motive,  and,  charging  them  with 
the  subtlest  cruelty  in  thus  tempting  Christians  to  lose  their 
souls,  loudly  insists  upon  his  right  to  earn  the  martyr's  crown. 
Let  us  examine  the  chief  points  advanced  by  Tertullian  in 
the  Apolog"y.     We  find  they  are  mainly  these  : — 

I.  He  appeals  for  bare  justice.  The  authorities  do  not 
understand  what  Christianity  is.  They  brand  it  as  a  crime, 
and  yet,  by  forcing  people  to  disavow  it,  show  that  they  do 
not  believe  it  to  be  such.  They  punish  the  name,  not  the 
thing.  Trajan's  rescript  to  Pliny,  which  is  the  authoritative 
statement  of  the  attitude  of  the  government  to  Christianity, 
stands  self-condemned.  It  forbids  Christians  to  be  sought 
for,  but  when  found,  enjoins  their  punishment.  Nothing 
can  be  more  contradictory.  In  the  relations  of  law  with 
justice,  of  magistrates'  practice  with  the  principles  of  Roman 
jurisprudence,  Tertullian  is  thoroughly  at  home ;  and  he 
exposes  with  crushing  skill  the  inconsistent  and  unjust 
treatment  of  Christianity  by  the  State,  driving  it  from  shift 
to  shift,  till  at  last  it  is  compelled  to  take  its  stand  upon  the 
assertion  of  naked  force — Vote  shall  not  ccist  (non  licet  esse 
vos).  Tertullian  is  superior  to  other  apologists  in  his  clear 
insiirht  into  the  irreconcilable  antacfonism  that  underlies  the 
favour  or  toleration  accorded  by  indiWdual  emperors;  he 
feels  that  the  Church  and  the  Empire  are  really  incompatible, 

2  N 


562  LATIxN   CHRISTIANITY. 

but  while  he  claims  for  Christians  that  in  spite  of  this  they 
are  not  bad  subjects,  because  they  obey  Caesar  in  all  things 
lawful,  he  cannot  give  the  authorities  credit  for  genuinely 
misconceiving  the  drift  of  Christianity,  but  attributes  their 
occasional  kindness  in  discouraging  persecution  to  a  subtler 
cruelty,  which  would  rob  the  martyr  of  his  reward. 

2.  He  refutes  the  crimes  popularly  ascribed  to  the  "  sect," 
and  retorts  every  one  of  them  uj^on  the  accusers.  Human 
sacrifices,  incest  and  infanticide  are  brought  home  with  terrible 
force  to  the  votaries  of  Paganism.  He  does  not  spare  either 
their  religion  or  their  morality.  The  former  he  proves  to  be 
atheism  thinly  veiled  under  a  multitude  of  gross  superstitions, 
the  latter  he  proves  to  retain  what  pure  elements  it  does 
retain  not  because  of  but  in  spite  of  its  divine  examples. 
In  retort  and  repartee  Tertullian  is  at  his  strongest;  the 
argumentum  ad  liomincm  is  his  favourite  weapon.  And  this 
weapon,  however  logicians  may  deprecate  it  as  beside  the 
point,  never  fails  to  have  a  strong  effect  upon  the  average 
man  of  the  world.  We  must  remember  that  the  Apolog}'  is 
not  an  abstract  treatise,  but  a  real  vindication,  intended  to 
have  a  practical  effect.  And  if  it  uses  methods  that  savour 
of  forensic  triumph  rather  than  of  Christian  meekness,  it  is 
but  fair  to  allow  the  advocate  full  liberty  to  present  his  case 
as  favourably  for  himself  and  as  damagingly  to  his  opponents 
as  he  can. 

3.  After  refuting  misconceptions,  he  next  proceeds  to  state 
what  Christians  really  do  worship.  From  the  seventeenth  to 
the  twenty-eighth  chapters  he  gives  an  account  of  the  true 
God,  as  revealed  in  nature  and  in  Scripture,  and  partly 
recognised  by  the  higher  minds  among  the  heathen.  He 
then  treats  of  Christ,  and  in  a  brief  but  interesting  rcsumt!  of 
the  evidence  of  the  prophets,  he  compares  his  own  Christo- 
logical  doctrine  with  the  Jewish  notions  of  Messiah  and  the 
Stoic  theory  of  the  \o709.^  He  cites  documentary  evidence 
to  prove  that  "■  even  the  Ciesars  would  have  believed  in 
Christ,  if  Caesars  were  not  necessary  for  the  world,  or  if 
Christians  could  have  been  Ciesars." 

^  See  Hatch,  Hibbert  Lectures. 


TERTULLIAN.  563 

4.  The  closing  chapters  are  devoted  to  a  justification  of  the 
Christians  as  loyal  subjects.  Though  they  will  not,  cannot 
recognise  an  emperor  as  God,  they  yet  hold  his  power  to  be 
divine,  and  pray  for  him  to  God,  not  with  the  lips,  but  from 
the  heart — not  only  because  it  is  laid  upon  them  as  a  duty, 
but  from  the  yet  stronger  motive  of  averting  the  final  doom, 
of  which  the  Empire,  while  it  remains,  is  a  preventive. 

One  objection  against  the  Christian  community  was  the 
jealousy  felt  towards  all  clubs  and  associations,  lest  they 
should  lend  themselves  to  political  ends.  But  this  Tertullian 
shows  to  be  without  foundation.  "  Nothing  is  so  indifferent 
to  us  as  the  government ;  we  have  but  one  duty  to  it,  i.e.,  to 
submit  to  it  in  all  lawful  things."  ''To  us,"  he  adds,  "our 
worship  is  the  main  concern,  and  with  that  you  and  yours 
have  nothing  to  do."  He  rightly  appreciates  the  formidable 
effect  of  a  body  so  spiritually  harmonious  upon  the  mechani- 
cally united  sections  of  a  society  which,  but  for  external 
pressure,  would  go  to  pieces;  and  he  does  not  exaggerate 
when  he  cries,  "  'Tis  our  mutual  love  that  makes  you  hate 
us.  The  smallest  pretext  is  seized  to  bring. us  into  odium; 
to  deliver  us  to  shame  or  death.  This  discipline  purifies  our 
ranks,  and  makes  us  what  we  were  meant  to  be,  the  people 
of  the  true  God." 

The  foregoing  does  not  pretend  to  be  in  any  sense  an 
analysis  of  this  powerful  and  varied  work,  which,  written  in 
the  heat  of  just  excitement,  concentrates  within  a  moderate 
compass  an  immense  store  of  argument,  learning,  and  inde- 
pendent thought.  Its  faults  are  patent.  It  lacks  moderation, 
considerate ness,  sympathy ;  its  style  is  too  vehement,  its 
syntax  too  forced  ;  but  its  logic  is  unanswerable,  its  facts 
generally  trustworthy,  and  its  eloquence  at  times  sublime. 
It  must  be  allowed  the  first  place  in  point  of  effectiveness  of 
all  the  Apologies.  It  is  bolder  than  Justin's,  stronger  than 
Origen's,  juster  than  Tatian's,  and  shorter  than  Augustine's. 
It  presents  in  a  compendious  shape  the  repertory  of  apologetic 
arcfuments,  from  which  even  now  theolopfians  are  fain  to 
draw.  As  a  specimen  of  his  eloquence,  we  subjoin  part  of 
the  peroration : — 


J. 


564  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

Peroration  of  the  Apolog-y. 

"  Victory  is  uothin*,'  but  to  win  that  wliicli  you  have  fought 
for.  Our  victory  wins  the  glory  of  pleasing  God  and  the  reward 
of  eternal  life.  We  are  indeed  withdrawn  from  earth  at  the 
moment  we  gain  it.  Therefore,  with  us  to  die  is  victory ;  to  be 
withdrawn  is  to  be  set  free.  You  may  call  us  faggot -lighters 
and  wheel-turners  ^  when  you  bind  us  to  a  halfpenny  stake,  pile 
faggots  round  us  and  burn  us  to  death.  This  is  our  condition  of 
success,  this  our  robe  of  victory,  this  our  triumphal  car.  Natu- 
rally, those  we  conquer  do  not  love  us ;  naturally,  they  call  us 
miserable,  spiritless  wretches.  But  this  very  misery  and  want  of 
spirit,  when  displayed  by  one  of  themselves,  are  extolled  as  the 
highest  pinnacle  of  glory.  Mucins  thrust  his  right  hand  upon 
the  altar  and  let  it  burn  to  ashes.  What  sublime  courage ! 
Empedocles  hurled  himself  into  the  seething  flames  of  Etna. 
What  steadfastness  of  soul !  The  foundress  of  Carthage  gave 
her  body  to  be  wedded  to  her  husband's  funeral-pyre.  Wliat 
surpassing  purity  !  Regulus,  to  avoid  buying  the  lives  of  his 
enemies  as  the  price  of  his  own,  endured  the  torments  of  the 
cross  over  his  whole  body.  Ah  !  he  was  a  brave  man,  and  though 
a  captive,  a  conqueror.  Anaxarchus,  ground  to  death  by  a  pestle, 
cried  out,  '  Grind  away  !  you  cannot  hurt  me,  Anaxarchus.'  Yes  ; 
he  was  a  high-souled  philosopher,  who  could  jest  at  such  a  death. 
I  pass  by  those  wdio  have  won  high  praise  by  slaying  themselves 
with  the  sword  or  other  deadly  weapon.  You  crown  even  the 
conflict  with  torture.  An  Attic  harlot,  after  wearving  her  tor- 
^  mentor,  bit  off  her  tongue  and  spat  it  in  his  face,  lest  she  should 
betray  the  names  of  the  conspirators.  Zeno  of  Elen,  when  asked 
by  Dionysius  what  philosophy  could  do  for  him,  made  answer, 
*  It  can  teach  me  to  scorn  death ; '  and  so,  when  torn  by  the 
tyrant's  scourge,  he  persevered  steadfast  to  the  end.  The  stripes 
of  the  Spartan  boys,  multiplied  by  the  incitements  of  their  parents 
as  they  watched  the  punishment,  brought  as  much  honour  as 
they  involved  shedding  of  blood.  This,  forsooth,  is  a  legitimate 
theme  of  pride;  this  is  not  scoffed  at  as  mad  presumption  or 
the  fanaticism  of  despair.  Patriotism,  ambition,  friendship,  all 
justify  a  8tul)born  resolve,  a  contempt  of  life,  that  are  not 
justified  })y  the  Christian's  loyalty  to  liis  God.     Yes  !  you  erect 

^  Sarmenticii  ct  semaxii—opprohnous  epithets  ridiculing  the  tortures  of 
the  Christians. 


TERTULLIAN.  5^5 

statues  to  these  heroes,  and  engrave  inscriptions  in  their  honour, 
frivinor  them,  so  far  as  marble  monuments  can  do  it,  the  meed  of 
immortality — you  grant  to  them,  in  a  certain  shadowy  sense,  a 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  Yet  those  who  suffer  for  God's  sake, 
for  the  hope  of  a  real  resurrection,  these  are  madmen.  Go  your 
ways,  good  guardians  of  your  people,  all  the  better  in  their  eyes 
if  you  shed  the  blood  of  Christians ;  crucify  us,  rack  us,  crush  us, 
stamp  us  under  foot.  Your  injustice  is  the  seal  of  our  innocence. 
This  is  why  God  permits  us  to  suffer  such  things.  By  the  cry  so 
often  heard  of  late,  '  Christian  maids  to  the  pandar,'  instead  of, 
as  it  used  to  be,  '  to  the  lion,'  you  confess  that  loss  of  purity  is 
to  us  worse  than  any  punishment,  than  any  death,  and  yet  it  has 
never  yet  availed  to  tempt  us.  The  more  refined  your  cruelty, 
the  more  our  sect  grows.  The  more  you  mow  us  down,  the  more 
we  increase.  The  blood  of  Christians  is  the  seed  of  Christianity. 
Many  of  your  teachers  counsel  you  to  bear  pain  and  death,  as 
Cicero,  Seneca,  Diogenes,  Pyrrho,  and  Callinicus.  But  their 
words  find  fewer  to  imitate  them  than  do  the  Christians'  deeds. 
That  very  obstinacy  which  you  execrate  is  their  teacher.  For 
who,  when  he  beholds  it,  is  not  driven  to  inquire  what  it  really 
means  ?  Who,  when  he  has  inquired,  does  not  straightway  join  us? 
Who,  when  he  has  joined  us,  does  not  long  to  suffer,  to  purchase 
God's  grace  in  its  entirety,  to  gain  a  full  pardon  at  the  price  of 
his  blood  1  For  the  act  of  martyrdom  wins  free  forgiveness  of 
every  sin.  Thus  it  is  that  when  condemned  we  thank  you  for 
the  sentence.  There  is  emulation  in  Divine  tilings  as  in  human. 
When  you  condemn  us,  God  acquits  us." 

The  treatise  ad  Nation cs  is  a  shorter  sketch  or  study  of 
the  Apology,  and  was  probably  written  about  the  same  time. 
The  Address  to  Scapula  belongs  to  a  much  later  period,  but 
runs  in  the  same  vein,  sobered  and  softened  by  time.  The 
Witness  of  the  Soul  to  God,  which  must  be  ranked  among 
Tertullian's  apologetic  writings,  is  a  short  but  very  suggestive 
tract,  founded  on  a  passage  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of 
the  Apology,  of  which  it  is  an  amplification.  It  is  written 
throughout  in  his  best  manner,  and  reveals  in  its  method 
the  practised  hand  of  the  advocate.  lie  begins  by  asserting 
that  former  apologists  have  laboured  to  show  from  the  records 
of  heathen  antiquity  that  the  doctrine  of  Christianity  is  not 


566  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

wholly  new,  but  was  in  a  way  latent  in  their  own  poets  and 
philosophers.  But  the  heathen  have  hardened  their  hearts. 
Up  to  a  certain  point  they  have  gone  with  the  apologists, 
but  as  soon  as  the  specific  doctrines  of  Christianity  are 
alluded  to,  they  stop  their  ears.  Like  Agrippa,  they  are 
willing  to  be  almost  Christians,  but  no  more ;  and  this,  says 
TertuUian,  makes  me  despair  of  gaining  them  over  unless 
their  heart  is  already  Christian.  Therefore,  he  summons  to 
the  bar  a  new  witness,  namely,  the  soul  in  its  native  sim- 
plicity, before  it  has  been  tampered  with  by  argument  or 
learning,  and  bids  it  state  its  opinion.  His  words  are  so 
characteristic  that  they  deserve  to  be  quoted : — 

Address  to  the  Soul. 

"  Soul,  stand  thou  forth  in  the  midst,  whether  thou  art  a  thing 
divine  and  eternal,  according  to  most  philosophers,  and  therefore 
the  less  able  to  speak  falsely,  or,  as  seems  to  Epicurus  only,  in 
no  sense  divine,  because  mortal,  and  therefore  the  less  likely  to 
f^ive  false  evidence  in  this  cause.  Whether  thou  art  received 
from  heaven  or  conceived  in  the  earth,  or  fitly  framed  together 
of  parts  or  of  atoms,  from  whatsoever  source  and  in  whatsoever 
manner  thou  comest,  thou  makest  man  a  reasonable  creature 
more  capaljle  than  any  of  understanding  and  knowledge.  But  I 
summon  thee,  not  such  as  when  formed  in  the  schools,  exercised 
in  libraries,  nourished  in  the  academies  and  porches  of  Athens, 
thou  utterest  thy  crude  wisdom.  I  address  thee  as  simple  and 
rude,  and  uupolished  and  unlearned,  such  as  they  have  thee  who 
have  nothing  else  but  thee ;  the  very  and  entire  thing  that  thou 
art,  in  the  road,  the  highway,  the  shop  of  the  artisan.  I  have 
need  of  thy  inexperience  ;  since  in  thy  experience,  however  small, 
no  one  putteth  faith.  I  demand  of  thee  those  truths  which  thou 
carrii'st  with  thyself  into  man,  which  thou  hast  learned  to  know 
either  from  thyself  or  from  the  Author,  whosoever  He  be,  of 
thy  being.  Thou  art  not,  I  well  know,  a  Christian  soul ;  for 
thou  art  wont  to  be  made,  not  to  ])e  born.  Christian.  Yet  now 
the  Christians  demand  a  testimony  from  thee,  a  stranger,  against 
thy  own  friends,  that  they  may  bo  put  to  the  blush  before  thee, 
for  hating  and  scofling  at  us  on  account  of  those  very  things 
whieli  now  claim  thee  as  a  witness  on  thoir  side." 


TERTULLIAN.  567 

In  confirmation  of  the  above  argument,  he  adduces  such 
invohmtary  remarks,  heard  every  day,  as  "  If  God  will,'* 
"  God  grant,"  "  God  is  good  "  (not  "  Jupiter  grant,"  and  the 
like),  which  not  only  imply  the  Unity  of  God,  but  suggest 
also  the  evil  nature  of  man.  The  word  haufiovio^  ("possessed 
by  a  demon  "),  Malum  !  (implying  the  principle  of  evil),  are 
in  daily  use,  though  their  significance  is  not  realised.  When 
men  speak  of  the  dead  as  wretched  or  poor,  they  point  to 
punishment  after  death.  When  they  pray,  "  Liglit  he  the 
turf  of  thy  tomh,"  they  suggest  continued  sensation.  When 
they  say,  "Such  a  one  is  gone,"  they  suggest  the  thought 
of  a  return.  These  indications  are  not  to  be  dismissed  as 
trivial  or  unimportant,  being  as  they  are  the  voice  of  Nature, 
unsophisticated,  simple,  majestic.  In  fact,  polytheism  is  a 
degeneracy.  God  was  worshipped  before  gods  were  thought 
of.  These  voices  of  truth  are  not  Greek  or  Punic  or  Eoman, 
they  belong  to  ma?i  as  such.  We  cannot  disregard  them ; 
and  if  we  acknowledge  their  value,  we  shall  count  them  as 
precious  witnesses  to  the  Christian  faith. 

We  may  remark  on  this,  as  Neander  has  remarked,  that 
Tertullian  here  shows  a  deeper  apprehension  of  the  supreme 
claims  of  revealed  religion  than  his  rivals  of  the  great 
Alexandrian  school.  His  argument  is  but  a  restatement 
of  S.  Paul's  thesis :  "  The  world  by  wisdom  knew  not  God." 
The  truths  of  Christianity  can  neither  be  evolved  from  nor 
proved  by  the  processes  of  human  reason.  Their  foundation 
is  indeed  laid  deep  in  the  heart  of  man,  but  on  this  founda- 
tion has  been  reared  a  useless  structure,  which  must  be  swept 
away  before  the  edifice  can  be  securely  laid  upon  the  old  base. 
It  is  true  he  confounds  the  witness  to  mere  theism  with 
the  witness  to  Christianity.  And  even  here  his  argument 
is  at  fault;  for  although  polytheism  represents  a  stage  in 
man's  spiritual  development,  it  is  indubitably  true  tliat  the 
whole  tendency  of  serious  heathen  thought  was  tending 
irresistibly  towards  the  acknowledgment  of  the  Unity  of 
God.  Wr  can  see  this,  and  we  wonder  at  the  inability  of  so 
many  of  the  Fathers  to  see  it  too.  But  the  close  alliance  be- 
tween philosophy  and  tlic  Pagan  rrligion  mad**  tliciii  unjust 


568  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

towards  the  real  ti'achiii<(  of  the  former,  and  Tertullian  is 
too  much  in  earnest  in  his  conflict  with  the  current  super- 
stition to  make  distinctions  which  were  rather  speculative 
than  practical.  He  must  be  allowed  full  credit  for  the 
splendid  originality  of  his  argument  in  this  treatise,  and  for 
the  vivid  force  with  which  he  presses  the  instinct  of  humanity 
into  the  service  of  truth. 

The  treatise  Ayainst  the  Jews  is  naturally  of  somewhat 
narrower  scope,  but  it  has  the  merit  of  bringing  out  into 
bold  relief  some  important  deductions  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 

Setting  aside  the  conventional  or  fanciful  lines  of  reason- 
ing with  which,  in  deference  to  prevailing  fashion,  he  varies 
his  argument,  his  main  point  is  well  worthy  of  consideration. 
It  is  this,  that  the  Law  in  its  deeper  and  only  true  sense  is 
not  Jewish  but  universal.  The  ^losaic  system  is  but  a  stage 
in  the  great  process  from  the  primeval  law  of  unreflecting 
custom  to  the  higher  law  of  voluntar}-  obligation.  Tertullian 
interprets  the  meaning  of  the  Law  by  applying  the  commen- 
tary of  prophecy.  He  is  not,  like  Barnabas,  satisfied  with 
making  the  Law  purely  symbolical ;  nor,  like  Origen,  with 
spiritualising  it  into  allegory.  He  seeks  for  something  more 
tangible,  more  real,  and  he  finds  it  in  the  theology  of  the 
prophets,  for  whom  the  Law  was  above  all  things  a  mani- 
festation of  the  Divine  character.  Had  the  modem  theory 
of  the  posteriority  of  the  Priestly  Code  to  the  great  prophetic 
era  been  known  to  him,  it  is  probable  he  would  have  accepted 
it.  He  seems  to  feel  the  presence  of  a  Jewish  bias  in  the 
existing  recension  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  he  accordingly 
treats  the  Scriptures,  and  especially  the  prophets,  with  con- 
siderable freedom.  His  interpretations  are  not  indeed  free 
from  the  faults  of  his  age,  but  on  the  whole  they  show  a 
stronger  grasp  upon  the  essence  of  revealed  truth  than  those 
of  the  Alexandrian  school,  and,  though  lacking  the  historical 
insight  of  the  school  of  Antioch,  they  are  always  instructive 
from  their  earnestness,  originality,  and  force. 

In  his  computations  of  dates  he  is  less  happy ;  indeed,  his 
temper  of  mind  was  unsuited  to  the  dispassionate  examination 


TERTULLIAN.  569 

of  any  evidence,  to  say  nothing  of  the  conflicting  and  obscure 
records  of  ancient  chronological  systems.  The  last  chapters 
(ix.  to  the  end)  cover  the  same  ground  as  is  gone  over  in  the 
third  book  against  Marcion. 

This  work  is  one  of  those  that  have  been  laid  under  con- 
tribution by  Cyprian,  who  was  not  only  a  constant  reader 
but  a  constant  imitator  of  Tertullian,  adopting  his  arguments 
while  diluting  their  language.  This  is  especially  seen  in 
his  treatises  ad  Quirinum  and  de  Patientia,  when  compared 
with  the  similar  writings  of  Tertullian. 

We  may  just  notice  here  the  short  work  de  Pallio,  a 
somewhat  burlesque  apology  for  wearing  the  philosopher's 
cloak.  It  is  a  slight  and  not  very  pleasing  sketch ;  and  one 
could  wish  that  the  writer,  w^ho,  whatever  his  powers  of 
satire,  is  absolutely  without  a  trace  of  humour,  had  been 
content  to  wear  his  cloak  without  thinking  it  necessary  to 
write  about  it. 

Controversial  Writings. 

Tertullian's  controversial  writings,  if  any  can  monopolise 
that  title  where  all  bristle  with  controversy,  may  next  be 
considered.  They  are  as  follows  : — Dc  Prccscriptione  Hccrc- 
ticorum,  adversus  Marcionem,  adversus  Valentinianos^  ad- 
versus  Hermof/enem,  Scorpiacc  adversus  Gnosticos,  adxersus 
Praozean,  all  but  the  first  being  coloured  by  his  Montanistic 
prejudices.  They  are  all  characterised  by  the  same  boldness 
of  language,  ingenuity  of  argument,  and  logical  cogency, 
and  they  all  alike  lack  the  power  of  understanding  his 
opponent's  ground,  which  v:c  rightly  judge  to  be  the  fore- 
most qualification  for  controversy. 

In  the  de  P rocscriptionc  (a  legal  term,  implying  what  is 
sanctioned  by  law  and  usage),  he  deals  witli  the  general 
tendencies  of  heretical  teaching  as  distinct  from  individual 
systems  ;  for  the  latter  part  of  the  work,  whicli  enumerates 
the  various  leaders  of  heresy,  with  their  characte^ristic  doc- 
trines, is  evidently  a  later  production  from  another  and 
much  inferior  pen.    As  usual,  we  shall  not  attempt  to  give  an 


570  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

analysis  of  the  treatise,  but  shall  brietiy  indicate  its  main 
points. 

These  are  two — (a)  the  relation  of  heresy  to  philosophy, 
(h)  the  relation  of  heretics  to  Scripture  : — 

(a.)  Tertullian  regards  heresy  as  the  daughter  of  heathen 
philosophy.  In  this  he  is  at  one  with  Hippolytus,  whose 
earlier  work  he  may  possibly  have  read.  He  is  so  far  right, 
that  beyond  question  the  Greek  philosophic  systems  were 
the  main  source  from  whence  the  Gnostics  drew ;  but  he 
does  not  allow  sufficiently  for  the  Oriental  elements  (probably 
very  imperfectly  known  to  him)  whicli  so  largely  affected 
their  speculations. 

(h.)  With  regard  to  the  authority  of  Holy  Scripture  as  the 
final  court  of  appeal,  he  is  not  content  with  affirming  it,  but 
he  absolutely  denies  the  right  of  heretics  to  use  it  for  their 
own  benefit.  Being  already  cut  off  from  the  Catholic  Church, 
which  alone  can  pretend  to  inter[)ret  Scripture  aright,  their 
recourse  to  it  as  a  common  arbiter  can  only  involve  mis- 
conception. Where  the  relations  of  the  two  parties  differ  so 
fundamentally,  no  good  can  come  of  concessions  on  either 
side.  The  only  safe  criterion  is  the  rule  of  faith,  rejula 
fidei,^  handed  down  from  the  first  in  the  churches  known 
to  be  apostolic.  These  are  the  guardians  of  the  truth,  and 
from  these  alone  the  true  sense  of  Scripture  is  to  be  sought. 
Difference  between  these  is  not  to  be  thought  of.  Their 
testimony  is  one  and  undivided,  and  their  common  judgment 
is  final.  The  Roman  Church  he  extols  as  representing  the 
fullest  measure  of  apostolic  teaching ;  but  he  by  no  means 
ascribes  to  it  any  supremacy  over  the  churches  of  Greece, 
Alexandria,  and  Asia  Minor,  which  can  show  an  equal  claim 
to  apostolic  origin.  As  locally  nearer  to  Italy,  he  looks  to 
Home  as  his  guide  ;  but  the  Greek  would  more  naturally 
turn  to  Corinth  or  Pliilippi,  the  Asiatic  to  Ephesusor  Smyrna, 
the  Syrian  to  Jerusalem  or  Antioch. 

jTJic  Five  Boohs  against  Marcion. — This  work,  which  in  its 
present  form  belongs  to  his  latest  period,  was  rewritten  twice 

'  This  is  given  in  several  of  liis  treatises.  It  contains  the  nucleus  of 
our  Apostles'  creed. 


TERTULLIAN.  571 

or  three  times.  The  Marcionite  heresy,  on  which  TertuUian 
pours  out  the  fiercest  vials  of  his  wrath,  arose  at  so  early  a 
date  (probably  as  far  back  as  the  death  of  Hadrian,  A.D.  138), 
that  TertuUian  does  not  trouble  himself  to  inquire  very 
deeply  into  its  origin.  His  extreme  dislike  of  it  is  attri- 
butable chiefly  to  two  of  its  features,  first,  to  its  separation 
between  the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  and  that  of  the 
New,  and  secondly,  to  its  pronounced  moral  rigorism.  The 
former,  as  he  truly  remarks,  subverts  the  essence  of  Chris- 
tianity ;  the  latter,  being  closely  akin  to  his  own  peculiarities, 
roused  his  special  ire  as  a  counterfeit  and  a  rival. 

The  history  of  the  treatise  is  probably  as  follows.  The 
first  draft  may  have  been  written  hastily  about  A.D.  199,  at 
the  time  he  was  composing  his  Prccscriptio,  but  was  after- 
wards replaced  by  a  more  finished  composition.  This  compo- 
sition he  afterwards  disavowed,  as  a  friend,  who  had  become 
a  Marcionite,  procured  it  by  stealth  and  published  it  in  a 
garbled  form.  He  therefore  wrote  a  third  and  completer 
edition,  probably  about  207  or  208,  the  same  which  we  now 
possess. 

This  work  is  written  with  great  care,  and  grapples  more 
or  less  thoroughly  with  all  the  main  doctrines  of  the  heresi- 
arch.  The  tenets  of  Marcion  are  given  under  the  chapter 
devoted  to  him,  and  need  not  be  mentioned  here.  It  is 
sufficient  to  remark  that  the  most  difficult,  and  to  a  believer 
the  most  dangerous  of  them  all,  viz.,  the  evidences  against 
the  goodness  of  the  Creator  of  the  World,  is  the  one  with 
which  TertuUian  is  least  competent  to  deal.  The  problem 
is  one  that  demands  the  exercise  of  faith  rather  than  of 
abstract  argument ;  but  TertuUian  is  fully  justified  in  his 
severe  assertion  that  as  a  rule  "  heretics  labour  not  to  convert 
heathens,  but  to  subvert  Christians." 

Adversus  Valcntianos  and  advcrsus  Hcrmogcnem  are  two 
shorter  treatises  directed  against  the  Gnostic  leader  and  one 
of  his  somewhat  aberrant  disciples.  In  common  with  the 
treatise  against  Marcion,  tliey  are  characterised  by  ungenerous 
attacks  upon  the  character  of  his  opponents.  Hermogenes 
can  scarcely  with  any  colour  be  called  a  Christian.    TertuUian, 


572  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

therefore,  has  an  easy  task  in  refuting  him.  As  an  instance 
of  his  incapacity  to  give  heretics  credit  for  the  motives  they 
profess,  we  may  cite  a  passage  from  the  first  book  against 
Marcion  (chap,  xxvii.),  where  he  argues  that  the  claim  ad- 
vanced by  him  to  be  above  the  fear  of  Divine  wrath  must 
be  false  : — 

"  If  God  be  not  an  object  of  fear  (he  says),  why  do  you  not 
take  your  fill  of  the  enjoyments  of  this  life  ?  Why  do  you  not 
frequent  the  arena,  the  circus,  the  theatre  ?  Why  do  you  not 
boil  over  with  every  kind  of  lust  ?  When  the  censer  is  handed 
you,  and  you  are  asked  to  offer  a  few  grains  of  incense,  why  do 
you  not  deny  your  faith  ?  '  God  forbid,'  you  cry.  Then  you  fear 
sin  ;  and  you  show  tliat  lie  who  forbids  it  is  an  object  of  fear." 

So  impossible  does  disinterested  holiness  seem  in  the  person 
of  a  heretic !  And  so  truly  is  Tertullian  the  precursor  of  some 
modern  champions  of  orthodoxy  ! 

The  Scoi-jriace,  or  "  Antidote  to  the  Scorpion-like  Venom  of 
Heretical  Doctrine,"  was  written  in  A.D.  211,  evidently  in  a 
time  of  persecution.  It  combats  the  Gnostic  argument  that 
martyrdom  is  unnecessary.  As  a  Montanist,  Tertullian  held 
the  absolute  obligation  of  meeting  persecution  instead  of 
flying  from  it ;  and  he  urges  this  view  with  unfeigned  sin- 
cerity. His  little  treatise  bums  with  a  white  glow  of  zeal ; 
the  writer  lives  as  in  an  enemy's  camp ;  he  hears  the  rumble 
of  a  world's  doom  muttering  round  him,  but  his  eye  is  fixed 
on  the  glory  that  awaits  the  warrior  saint,  and  the  charm  of 
life  has  no  power  to  withdraw  his  gaze. 

Ach'crsus  Praxcan. — This  pamphlet,  written  probably  as 
late  as  a.d.  222,  is  directed  against  a  heresy  of  a  different 
class  from  those  which  had  engaged  Tertullian's  earlier 
powers,  namel}",  that  of  Monarchianism,  or  Patripassianism 
as  its  antagonists  preferred  to  call  it.  The  personality  of  this 
Praxeas  is  enveloped  in  mystery,  llippolytus,  writing  near 
Home,  mentions  Noetus,  Epigonus,  Callistus  and  Sabellius  as 
favouring  or  propagating  ^Monarchian  views,  but  he  never 
alludes  to  Praxeas.  Hence  some  have  thought  that  Praxeas 
is  a  nickname,  due  to  Tertullian's  harsh  pleasantry.      This, 


TERTULLIAN.  573 

however,  is  very  improbable.  Praxeas  was  no  doubt  a  real 
person,  who  transferred  his  activity  from  Home  to  Carthage, 
where  Tertullian  came  into  contact  with  him.  It  seems  that 
years  before  (a.d.  185)  when  Pope  Eleutherus  was  almost 
gained  over  by  the  Montanists,  IVaxeas  came  to  Rome  from 
Asia  Minor,  and  induced  him  to  pronounce  against  them. 
While  at  Carthago  some  seventeen  years  later,  Praxeas  is 
said  to  have  been  converted  to  the  orthodox  side  by  Ter- 
tullian ;  but  when  the  latter  became  a  Montanist,  he  made 
use  of  the  name  of  Praxeas  as  a  cover  for  attacking  the 
Patripassian  party  generally,  and  among  them  the  Popes 
Zephyrinus  and  Callistus.  The  ^lonarcliian  party,  whose 
tenet  was  the  acknowledgment  of  a  single  principle  only 
in  the  Godhead,  spread  widely  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century  over  both  the  Eastern  and  Western  world.  It  was 
divided  into  two  sections — 

(i.)  The  Ebionite  Monarchians,  as  they  were  somewhat 
incorrectly  called,  who  held  humanitarian  views  of  Christ, 
regarding  the  Divine  Sonship  as  a  mere  metaphor. 

(2.)  Those  who  denied  the  distinction  of  Persons  in  the 
Godhead,  and  regarded  the  Logos  as  essentially  identical 
with  the  Father,  holding  that  the  Son  did  not  exist  until 
after  the  Incarnation. 

Both  these  divisions  were  of  Eastern  origin,  where  they 
were  known  by  the  name  of  Sabellians.  The  term  Monarchian 
is  as  old  as  Justin,  though  the  development  of  the  doctrine  is 
later.  Monarchianism  was  a  reaction  against  Gnosticism,  with 
its  endless  subdivisions  of  the  Godhead.  The  Sabelliau  heresy  ^ 
is  first  noted  at  Home  by  Novatian,  where  it  was  found  by 
Origen  at  his  visit  in  219.  About  the  middle  of  the  third 
century  (A.D.  260)  it  burst  out  in  Africa  and  Eg}']:)t,  and  was 
combated  by  the  great  Dionysius.  And  even  far  into  the 
fourth  century  the  controversy  continued  to  rage. 

1  The  doctrine  of  the  ^Uvapxia,  i.e.,  the  S'm\;\c  Fount  of  Doity,  is  ortho- 
dox, and  found  in  Ircnicus,  A.D.  190.  The  heresy  of  Sabi'llius  rose  from  a 
just  protest  one-sidedly  maintained.  Hippolytus  and  Ircn;uus  draw  from 
it  the  inference  that  if  the  Son  is  but  a  manifestation  of  the  Supreme  God, 
God  the  Father  must  have  suffered.     Hence  the  epithet  Patripassian. 


574  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

Tcrtiillian,  as  nsiial,  avoiding  metaphysical  subtlety,  brings 
out  for  the  benefit  of  the  average  believer  the  paramount 
importance  of  not  compromising  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of 
God.  But  he  nevertheless  holds  the  Trinity,  tj^i^ical  illustra- 
tions of  which  he  declares  have  been  revealed  to  him  by  the 
Paraclete.  In  the  course  of  the  argument,  he  is  led  to  a 
statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  one  of  the 
earliest  ^'itnesses  to  the  position  held  by  the  Third  Persons 
of  the  Trinity  in  the  belief  of  the  early  Church. 


Dog-matic  Treatises. 

We  come  now  to  his  dogmatic  treatises — Dc  Baptismo,  de 
Carne  Christie  de  Rcsicrrcciionc  Carnis,  de  Anima ;  all  of 
which  are  very  remarkable,  and  worthy  of  attentive  study. 
The  treatise  on  the  Trinity  is  unhappily  lost. 

Dc  Baptisjuo. — The  opening  sentence  is  so  characteristic 
a  specimen  of  his  style,  that  it  desei-ves  to  be  quoted : — 

"A  certain  most  venomous  serpent  of  the  heresy  of  the 
Cainites  lately  dwelling  in  these  parts,  hath  carried  away  very 
many  with  her  doctrine,  beginning  with  the  overthrow  of 
Baptism  ;  plainly  according  to  her  nature ;  for  vipers,  asps  and 
basilisks  mostly  seek  out  places  that  are  dry  and  waterless.  But 
we,  poor  fishes,  following  after  our  Fish  {'X^'"^')  Jesus  Christ,  are 
born  in  water,  nor  are  we  safe  except  by  abiding  in  the  water. 
Therefore  that  monstrous  woman  Quintilla,  who  had  not  the 
right  even  to  teach  pure  doctrine,  knew  excellently  well  how  to 
kill  the  lishes  by  taking  them  out  of  the  water." 

The  discourse  is  divided  into  two  parts,  the  first,  treating 
of  the  efficacy  of  the  sacrament,  the  second,  of  the  questions 
of  practice  connected  with  it.  The  first  is  the  most  impor- 
tant;  and  [iffords  an  excellent  instance  of  the  different 
attitudes  with  which  an  ancient  and  a  modern  approach  a 
question  of  religious  or  metaphysical  thought.  Several 
chapters  are  taken  up  in  an  investigation  into  the  position 
assigned  to  the  element  of  water  in  the  histor}^  of  religion, 
false  and  true.     He  himself  is  astonished  at  the  multitude 


TERTULLIAN.  575 

of  instances  he  is  able  to  adduce ;  and  breaks  off  with 
an  apology,  lest  the  reader  should  think  that,  instead  of  a 
Christian  rite,  he  was  after  the  manner  of  sophists  writing 
on  "The  Praises  of  Water."  Now  we  see  here,  as  Hatch 
reminds  us,  a  state  of  mind  and  thought  wholly  different 
from  our  own.  To  us  the  use  of  water  rather  than  any 
other  medium,  rests  on  the  command  of  Christ,  and  has  no 
relation  whatever  to  the  physical  properties  of  water.  No 
doubt  our  Lord  chose  water  from  its  special  appropriateness 
as  an  emblem  of  cleansing  ;  but  probably  no  one  at  the 
present  day  believes  in  any  direct  action  of  the  baptismal 
water  upon  the  soul.  This,  however,  is  precisely  the  belief 
that  Tertullian  docs  hold ;  to  him  the  mystical  union  of  the 
Spirit  with  the  physical  element  and  His  operation  through 
it  are  the  cardinal  verities  of  the  sacrament. 

"  Shall  the  wit  of  man  (he  says)  be  permitted  to  summon  a 
spirit  into  water,  and  by  adjusting  the  hands  above,  to  animate 
the  compound  of  the  tivo  with  another  spirit  of  such  dulcet  sound 
{i.e.,  the  music  of  a  hydraulic  organ);  and  shall  not  God  be  per- 
mitted by  means  of  holy  hands  to  tune  His  own  instrument  (viz., 
man)  to  the  lofty  strains  of  the  Spirit  ? " 

To  us  the  chasm  between  spirit  and  matter  is  unbridged, 
the  direct  action  of  either  upon  the  other  is  inconceivable : 
to  an  ancient,  familiar  with  the  materialism  of  the  Stoics, 
such  action  appeared  the  most  natural  thing  in  the  world. 

The  many  topics  of  interest  discussed  in  the  second  part 
of  this  treatise  can  here  only  be  alluded  to ;  such  as  whether 
the  Apostles  were  baptized,  and  if  so,  whether  by  John's 
baptism  ;  whether  heretical  baptism  is  to  be  accepted,  which 
he  decides  emphatically  in  the  negative, ^  enjoining  their 
rebaptism  in  the  Church :  whether  laymen  and  women  can 
baptize ;  whether  baptism  should  be  hastened  or  delayed  in 
the  case  of  infants,  unmarried  men,  and  widows.  His  con- 
clusions on  these  latter  points  are  sufficiently  startling,  and 
prove  that  he  regarded  baptism  not  as  an  opus  opcratiun,  but 
as  a  voluntary  and  conscious  act  of  individual  responsibility, 
^  See  under  Cyprian. 


576  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

which  onglit  never  to  be  lightly  undertaken ;  in  fact,  much 
as  Protestant  churches  regard  participation  in  the  Lord's 
Supper.  He  concludes  with  directions  as  to  the  fittest  times 
for  administering  the  rite,  and  the  preparation  necessary  for 
those  who  receive  it. 

The  treatises  dc  Came  Christi  and  de  Rcsurredione  Carnis 
are  closely  connected,  and  are  directed  against  the  fashionable 
Gnostic  misconceptions,  especially  those  of  ^larcion  and  his 
school.  The  former  is  highly  controversial :  the  style  lively 
and  nervous,  very  rhetorical,  and  extremely  difficult,  abound- 
ing in  philosophical  terms,  many  apparently  coined  for 
the  occasion,  and  sufficiently  expressive  and  original.  The 
physiological  examination  of  the  circumstances  of  our  Lord's 
birth  appears  somewhat  revolting ;  but  it  should  be  borne  in 
mind  that  the  process  of  arriving  at  clear  doctrinal  state- 
ments was  not  to  be  attained  without  a  thorough  sifting 
of  the  objections  raised,  many  of  them  by  men  of  sensual 
and  irreverent  minds,  who  gloried  in  the  objectionable  con- 
clusions to  which  they  strove  to  drive  those  who  maintained 
the  orthodox  faith. 

Both  this  treatise  and  that  On  the  JRcmrrcction  of  the  Flesh 
belong  to  his  Montanist  period.  In  the  latter  we  find  a 
striking  instance  of  Tertullian's  power  of  seizing  the  gist  of 
a  Christian  doctrine  and  stripping  it  of  adventitious  elements. 
He  insists  upon  the  essentiality  of  a  bodily  resurrection  to 
the  Christian's  hope.  The  immortality  of  the  soul  he  regards 
as  only  part  of  the  truth,  and  the  part  which  is  least  specifi-  < 
cally  Christian.  The  analogy  of  nature,  he  rightly  argues,) 
leads  us  to  believe  the  resurrection  of  the  body  rather  than 
the  immortality  of  the  soul.  The  splendid  chapter  of  Pear- 
son, in  which  the  annual  quickening  of  nature  is  adduced  as 
a  witness  of  the  eternal  resurrection,  owes  its  force  and  much 
of  its  beauty  to  the  old  African  Father. 

Another  instance  of  Tertullian's  strong  common  sense  is 
his  refusal  to  weaken  the  testimony  of  Scripture  to  the 
Resurrection  by  any  allegorical  interpretation .  Allegory  he 
affirms  to  be  often  useful,  sometimes  necessaiy ;  but  where 
the  language  of  the  Bible  is  clear,  direct,  and  obvious,  the 


TERTULLIAN.  577 

plain  sense  must  at  all  costs  be  followed,  and  mystical 
explanations  eschewed.  This  treatise  is  lively  reading ;  full 
of  repartee,  retort  and  irony. 

De  Anima. — This  is  the  only  work  of  Tertnllian  that  can 
be  called  philosophical.  It  is  the  latest  outcome  of  his  mind 
on  the  subject  of  the  soul.  The  work  on  the  Origin  of  the 
Soul  {de  Ccnsu  Animce),  which  was  intermediate  between 
it  and  the  early  work  on  the  Witness  of  the  8oul  already 
noticed,  is  unfortunately  lost.  The  subjects  comprehended 
in  this  treatise  are  very  varied.  He  shows  strong  traces  of 
Stoic  and  Platonic  influence,  especially  in  his  assertion  that 
the  soul  is  more  akin  to  God  than  to  the  world.  The  object 
of  the  work  is  the  refutation  of  philosophy,  "  the  mother  of 
heresy." 

He  attributes  corporeity  to  the  soul,  but  in  a  Stoic,  not  in 
an  Epicurean  sense,^  and  he  even  goes  so  far  as  to  postulate 
a  body  for  the  Divine  Being  Himself.  This  error  has  called 
forth  the  censure  of  Augustine,  expressed,  however,  with 
generous  tenderness : — 

"  Tertnllian,  as  his  writings  show,  affirms  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  but  declares  that  it  is  a  body  with  a  shape  {effh/iatum 
corpus).  And  not  only  so,  but  he  asserts  also  that  God  is  cor- 
poreal, though  without  a  form.  Yet  this  is  not  sufficient  to 
make  him  rank  as  a  heretic.  For  he  may  be  supposed  to  speak 
of  the  nature  and  substance  of  Deity  as  corporeal  without  neces- 
sarily attributing  to  it  a  body  with  greater  and  lesser  parts,  as 
is  the  case  with  bodies  properly  so  called,  although  he  does  seem 
to  attribute  to  the  soul  this  kind  of  corporeity.  But  he  may  be 
considered  to  have  spoken  of  God  as  a  body  in  the  sense  that  He 
is  not  nothino;,  that  He  is  not  void,  that  He  is  not  a  quality  of 
body  or  soul,  but  is  everywhere  entire ;  not  divided  according  to 
the  regions  of  space,  but  immutably  constant  in  His  own  nature 
and  substance." 

1  He  naturally  shrinks  from  the  idea  that  the  universe  itself  is  the 
body  of  the  Deity.  His  mind  oscillates  between  the  view  of  the  Divine 
Immanence  in  creation,  and  the  deistic  theory  of  an  Omnipotent  Creator 
enthroned  in  a  distant  region  of  space,  and  not  entering  into  contact  with 
the  Universe  He  has  made.  His  immense  inferiority  to  Augustine  as  a 
metaphysician  is  evident  the  moment  they  are  compared. 

2  O 


578  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

This  generous  and  appreciative  criticism  from  so  high  an 
authority  must  be  allowed  great  weight.  There  can  be  little 
doubt  that  a  mind  so  strongly  sensuous  and  unmetaphysical 
as  Tertullian's  was  unable  to  conceive  of  substance  apart 
from  matter,  and  that  all  he  intended  to  assert  dogmatically 
was,  as  Augustine  says,  the  essential  reality  of  God.  As 
before  remarked,  there  was  not  the  same  absolute  severance 
in  ancient  philosophy  between  the  realms  of  matter  and 
spirit  as  there  is  in  modern  thought;  and  it  took  some 
generations  of  Christian  metaphysics  to  establish  on  a  firm 
basis  the  immateriality  of  the  Divine  principle.  His  theor}^ 
of  Traducianism,  or  the  sowing  of  the  soul  with  the  body 
in  the  womb,  is  another  point  of  departure  from  what  was 
afterwards  established  as  orthodox  doctrine. 

The  short  treatise  On  Prayer  may  be  noticed  in  this  con- 
nection. It  belongs  to  his  earlier  period,  and,  as  we  learn 
from  Hilary,  was  highly  thought  of  by  the  Church,  though 
to  some  extent  superseded  by  the  more  elegant  imitation  of 
it  by  Cyprian.  After  an  exposition  of  the  several  petitions 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  in  which  the  most  noteworthy  feature 
is  his  transposition  of  the  second  and  third  clauses,  he 
prescribes  rules  for  prayer  in  general,  and  takes  occasion  to 
notice  several  customs  of  his  day,  which  to  us  form  the  most 
L^  interesting  portion  of  the  work.     We  learn,  for  instance, 

that  it  was  usual  before  praying  to  wash  the  hands,  and 
sometimes  the  entire  body;  that  it  was  the  practice  of  some 
^  not  only  to  lift  up  their  hands  in  prayer,  but  to  spread  them 

out  in  imitation  of  the  Saviour's  attitude  on  the  cross ;  that 
some  prayed  with  their  cloaks  put  off,  as  the  heathen  ap- 
proached their  idols ;  that  others,  after  praying,  sat  down, 
another  heathen  custom  which  they  adopted  on  the  authority 
of  Hermas,  forgetting  that  it  was  unseemly  to  be  seated  in 
the  presence  of  God.  Others,  again,  prayed  in  stentorian 
tones,  as  though  God  were  deaf ;  others,  after  prayer,  with- 
drew from  the  kiss  of  peace.  This  practice  he  attributes  to  a 
desire  to  gain  credit  for  stricter  fasting  than  their  neighbours, 
since  those  who  fasted  usually  abstained  from  this  ceremony. 
Many  other  details  are  mentioned,  for  which  we  must  refer 
the  curious  reader  to  the  treatise  itself. 


TERTULLIAN.  579 


Moral  and  Practical  Treatises. 

It  remains  to  consider  very  briefly  liis  moral  and  practical 
treatises,  the  greater  part  of  which  are  infected  with  ]\Ion- 
tanistic  error.  They  may  be  conveniently  divided  into  four 
groups,  those  wliicli  touch  on  martyrdom,  those  which  relate 
to  idolatry  and  its  accessories,  those  which  relate  to  female 
conduct,  and  those  on  fasting,  penitence,  and  patience. 

(i.)  The  first  group  contains  two  works,  the  Exhortation 
to  Martyrs  and  the  pamphlet  0)i  Flight  in  Persecution.  The 
former  is  one  of  his  most  beautiful  productions,  breathing  a 
spirit  of  ardent  devotion  and  deep  Christian  humility.  Wliile 
praising  the  constancy  of  the  "  blessed  men  "  who  are  await- 
ing their  fate  in  the  gloomy  prison,  he  stops  far  short  of  the 
fulsome  encomiums  with  which  Cyprian  loads  the  martyrs 
and  confessors  to  whom  he  writes.  The  second  treatise  is 
of  a  different  cast.  The  tone  is  strained  and  overwrought, 
and  the  conclusion  to  which  he  comes,  that  flight  from  danger 
is  never  permissible  to  the  Christian,  is  in  direct  contradic- 
tion to  the  Lord's  own  words  and  the  decision  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  Nevertheless,  it  contains  some  fine  passages  and 
several  smart  home-thrusts.  He  is  exceptionally  severe  on 
the  already  common  practice  of  securing  immunity  from  per- 
secution by  paying  blackmail.  The  class  of  public  informers 
who  had  once  been  the  terror  of  the  Roman  nobles  now  plied 
their  base  avocation  to  the  injury  of  the  Christians,  and  such 
Christians  as  were  well-to-do  were  glad  to  bargain  for  their 
safety.  Not  only  individuals,  but  whole  churches,  headed 
by  their  bishops,  stood  in  this  position.  The  persuasive 
sophistry  which  justified  the  practice  as  only  giving  to  Caesar 
what  was  Ca3sar's,  was  indignantly  rejected  by  Tertullian. 
He  protests  against  it  for  the  credit  of  the  Christian  name, 
as  well  as  on  prudential  grounds.  Clandestine  bribes  are 
worse  than  open  ones ;  they  become  an  ever-increasing  and 
at  last  a  ruinous  burden ;  and,  when  they  can  no  longer  be 
borne,  then  comes  exposure  and  the  vengeance  of  the  insulted 
laws.    It  would,  however,  be  possible  to  remove  this  objection 


58o  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

if  the  State  would  take  the  initiative,  and,  as  a  means  of 
increasing  its  fast- falling  revenue,  would  impose  a  direct 
tax  on  the  Christian  profession.  Whether  this  suggestion  is 
meant  seriously  or  in  irony  is  hard  to  say ;  but,  in  so  degene- 
rate a  society  as  the  Church  of  Carthage  had  become,  one 
cannot  wonder  at  the  stern  impatience  of  compromise  which 
in  this,  as  in  nearly  every  question  of  conduct,  seems  to 
TertuUian  tlie  first  condition  of  righteousness. 

(2.)  The  second  group  contains  some  highly  important 
writings,  which,  though  belonging  to  different  periods,  and 
revealing  a  progressive  intolerance  of  spirit,  are  sufficiently 
alike  to  be  dealt  with  together.  They  are  the  de  Spcdaculis, 
lie  Idololatria,  and  de  Corona  Militis.  The  sum  of  these 
brilliant  works  is  this :  the  Christian  must  flee,  at  whatever 
cost  to  feelings,  comfort,  or  safety,  from  everything  that 
savours  of  idolatrous  worship.  Since  the  daily  life  of  the 
Christian  was  encircled  on  every  side  with  heathen  customs, 
and  scarce  a  social  gathering,  an  act  of  business,  or  a  day's 
amusement  could  be  had  without  coming  into  contact  with 
the  accessories  of  paganism,  we  may  imagine  the  difficulty 
of  coming  to  a  right  decision  in  this  all-important  matter. 
If  Tertullian's  views  strike  us  as  too  severe,  it  is  certain  that 
the  error  with  most  people  lay  on  the  other  side.  It  is  cer- 
tain that  the  Christian  society  had  suffered  in  truthfulness,  in 
purity,  and  in  courage,  by  good-natured  or  timid  connivance 
at  things  they  were  bound  to  condemn.  The  more  carefully 
we  consider  the  circumstances  of  the  Christian  cliurches,  the 
need  of  holding  their  heavenly  trust  undefiled,  and  the  danger 
of  compromise  with  heretical  laxity  of  doctrine  or  manners, 
the  more  we  shall  be  convinced  that  TertuUian  is  in  the  right, 
and  that  the  stern  joy  of  the  warrior  in  a  combat  to  the  death 
was  the  true  note  to  sound,  the  true  frame  of  mind  for  the 
army  of  saints.  The  sophistries  which  allowed  Christian  men 
and  women  to  wreathe  their  heads,  to  hang  out  festal  lamps, 
to  attend  the  circus  and  the  theatre  and  even  the  bloody 
games  of  the  arena,  are  torn  to  shreds  by  the  fierce  irony  of 
a  true  man,  and  branded  with  the  name  of  the  devil  whose 
best  weapon  they  were.     It  is  true  there  is  little  charity  in 


TERTULLIAN.  581 

his  bnrninof  lof^ic.  His  heart  boils  with  a  lava  stream  of 
wrath,  but,  like  the  fiery  rain  of  Sodom,  the  purging  flood 
was  needed,  and  even  if  it  left  the  surface  salt  and  treeless, 
destruction  is  sometimes  the  only  remedy  left. 

We  append  two  examples  of  the  style  of  these  works. 
The  first  is  taken  from  the  de  Spedaculis,  which,  in  its  tone  of 
unhallowed  vengeance,  sinks  the  Christian  in  the  apocalyptic 
denouncer  of  woe,  but  from  its  extraordinary  intensity  of 
conviction  compels  the  wonder  of  the  coldest.  It  is  hard  for 
a  translator,  not  himself  kindled  by  the  same  might}^  passion, 
to  do  justice  to  the  terrible  vividness  of  the  original. 


Peroration  of  the  *'de  Spectaculis." 

"  But  if  you  are  minded  to  devote  this  short  space  to  delights, 
why  are  you  so  unthankful  as  to  reject  and  scorn  the  many  and 
great  pleasures  that  God  has  given  you  1  For  what  can  Ijc  more 
delightful  than  the  reconciling  of  our  Father  and  Lord,  the 
revealing  of  the  truth,  the  acknowledgment  of  onr  faults,  the 
forgiveness  of  all  past  sins  ?  What  pleasure  can  be  higher  than 
the  contempt  of  pleasure,  aye,  and  of  the  whole  world  ?  than  true 
liberty,  a  pure  conscience,  an  abounding  life,  with  no  fear  of 
death  1  than  to  tread  under  foot  the  gods  of  the  nations,  to  expel 
demons,  to  work  cures,  to  ask  for  revelations,  to  live  for  God  ? 
These  are  the  joys,  these  are  the  shows  of  Christians,  holy,  ever- 
lasting, free  to  all  :  in  these  I  would  have  you  find  your  circus 
games,  in  these  behold  the  race  of  the  ages,  and  the  headlong 
gallop  of  time ;  mark  these  out  as  the  laps  of  your  course,  look 
for  these  as  the  attainment  of  your  winning-post.  Guard  the 
associations  of  the  churches,  rouse  yourself  at  tlie  trumpet-call  of 
God,  start  at  the  angel's  blast,  boast  of  the  martyr's  crown.  Or 
if  the  splendours  of  tlie  theatre  delight  you,  wo  Christians  liave  an 
ample  literature,  abundance  of  poetry,  and  pithy  saws  ;  plenteous 
store  of  songs  and  recitations,  not  fables  but  truth,  not  artistic 
compositions,  but  simple  fact.  Or  do  you  ask  for  boxing  and 
wrestling  matches  ?  They  arc  at  hand,  neither  few  nor  insig- 
nificant. Look  on,  and  see  chastity  liurl  down  lewdness  ;  look  at 
perfidy  slain  by  faith,  cruelty  bruised  l)y  pity,  arrogance  thrown 
into  the  shade  by  modesty;  sucli  are  our  contests,  and  such  tlie 


582  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

crowns  we  win.  Or  do  you  crave  to  see  the  shedding  of  blood  ? 
Then  behold  Christ  slain.  And  what  a  S2)ectacle  we  have  at 
our  very  doors.  The  advent  of  the  Lord,  with  title  undisputed, 
proud,  triumi)hant !  What  exultation  of  angels,  what  splendour 
of  saints  as  tliey  rise  from  the  dead  !  Then  what  a  kingdom  for 
the  just !  What  a  city  is  tliis  of  ours,  the  new  Jerusalem  !  And 
yet  other  sights  remain.  That  last  immortal  judgment-day,  un- 
looked-for by  the  nations,  theme  of  their  mockery;  when  this 
old  worn-out  world  and  all  its  births  will  be  consumed  in  one 
vast  fire.  How  grand  will  that  spectacle  be !  How  I  shall 
admire  it !  How  I  shall  laugh,  rejoice  and  exult,  when  I  behold 
all  those  mighty  kings,  officially  declared  to  have  been  received 
into  heaven,  groaning  in  outer  darkness  together  with  Jove  him- 
self and  all  the  witnesses  of  their  apotheosis.  And  the  governors 
who  persecuted  the  name  of  the  Lord  melting  in  fiercer  flames 
than  those  with  which  they  raged  against  the  servants  of  Christ. 
And  those  wise  philosophers  blushing  red  before  their  disciples 
as  they  burn  to  ashes  in  company  with  those  whom  they 
persuaded  that  God  did  not  care  for  human  things,  that  souls 
either  did  not  exist  at  all,  or  if  they  did,  could  never  return 
to  their  bodies.  And  the  poets  too,  quivering  at  the  tribunal 
not  of  Rhadamanthus  or  Minos,  but  of  Christ  whom  they  had 
scorned.  Then  the  tragic  actors'  voices  will  be  better  heard, 
as  they  shriek  aloud  in  agony.  Then  the  players  will  exhibit  still 
more  lissome  gestures  as  they  twist  and  wi'ithe  in  the  fire.  Then 
the  charioteer  will  be  indeed  a  spectacle,  all  glowing  red  in  his 
fiery  chariot,  and  the  acrobats  will  hoist  their  bodies  about,  not 
in  the  gymnastic  school,  l)ut  in  the  fiery  fiame.  Only  I  would 
not  greatly  care  to  look  at  these,  but  would  turn  my  insatiable 
gaze  to  those  rather  who  vented  their  fury  upon  Jesus  the  Lord. 
See !  I  will  say  to  them  ;  here  is  He  whom  you  call  the  carpen- 
ter's son,  the  Sabbath-breaker,  the  Samaritan  that  hath  a  devil. 
Here  is  He  whom  you  bought  from  Judas;  here  is  He  whom 
you  mangled  with  rods,  fouled  with  spittings,  and  gave  to  drink 
vinegar  mingled  with  galL  Here  is  He  whom  His  disciples  stole 
away  secretly  to  report  Him  risen,  or  if  you  prefer  it,  whom  the 
gardener  put  away  lest  his  herbs  should  be  crushed  by  the  press 
of  feet.  What  praitor,  consul,  quaestor,  or  pontill  will  of  his 
bounty  grant  you  such  a  spectacle  as  this  to  gaze  at,  to  gloat 
over?  Yet  such  is  the  one  we  enjoy,  pictured  to  our  spirit  by 
the  eye  of  faith.     And  yet  what  must  those  others  be,   whicli 


TERTULLIAN.  583 

neither  eye  hath  seen  nor  ear  lieanl,  nor  hath  entered  into  the 
heart  of  man  to  conceive?  Pleasanter,  I  ween,  than  circus, 
theatre  or  amphitheatre,  or  any  raceconrse  on  earth," 

The  second  passage  is  taken  from  the  dc  Curona  Jfilitis, 
and  gives  Tertullian's  judgment  on  the  autliority  of  uon- 
Scriptural  tradition.  Its  interest  is  so  great  tliat  tlic  reader 
will  be  glad  to  have  it  in  full : — 

The  Authority  of  Tradition. 

"  What  is  the  authority  of  non-Scriptural  custom  1  It  is  binding 
on  us.  To  begin  with  baptism,  when  we  are  ai)out  to  advance 
to  the  water,  in  the  same  place,  but  at  a  somewhat  earlier  time, 
we  do  in  church  testify,  under  the  hand  of  a  chief  minister,  that 
we  renounce  the  devil,  his  pomps,  and  his  angels.  Then  we  are 
thrice  dipped,  pledging  ourselves  to  do  something  more  than  the 
Lord  hath  prescribed  in  the  Gospel ;  then,  some  undertaking  the 
charge  of  us,  we  first  receive  a  mixture  of  honey  and  milk,  and 
from  that  day  we  abstain  for  a  whole  week  from  our  daily  wash- 
ing. The  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  commanded  by  the  Lord 
at  the  time  of  the  supper  and  to  all,  we  receive  at  our  meetings 
before  daybreak,  and  from  the  hands  of  no  other  than  the  heads 
of  the  Church.  We  offer,  on  one  day  every  year,  oblations  for 
the  dead  as  birthday  honours.  On  the  Lord's  day  we  count  it  1 
unlawful  to  fast  or  to  worship  u23on  the  knees.  We  enjoy  the 
same  freedom  from  Easter  to  Pentecost.  We  feel  pained  if  any 
of  our  wine  or  even  of  our  bread  be  spilled  u[)on  the  ground.  In 
all  oiu'  travels  and  movements,  in  all  our  coming  in  and  going 
out,  in  putting  on  our  shoes,  at  the  bath,  at  the  table,  in  lighting 
our  candles,  in  lying  down,  in  sitting,  whatever  employment 
occupies  us,  we  mark  our  forehead  with  the  sign  of  the  cross.  1 
For  these  and  such  like  rules  if  thou  requirest  a  law  in  the 
Scriptures,  thou  shalt  find  none.  Tradition  will  bo  pleaded  to 
thee  as  originating  them,  custom  as  confirming  them,  and  faith 
as  observing  them.  That  reason  will  support  tradition  and 
custom  faith,  thou  wilt  either  thyself  perceive,  or  learn  from 
some  one  who  hath  perceived  it.  jMean while  thou  wilt  believe 
that  some  reason  there  is,  to  which  sui)mission  is  due." 

The  thorny  question  as  to  the  lawfulness  of  military  ser- 
vice is  discussed  in  the  same  treatise.     Tertulliau  will    not 


584  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

absolutely  deny  its  lawfulness  under  all  circumstances :  but 
he  regards  the  supreme  duty  of  abstaining  from  all  idolatrous 
acts  as  the  one  principle  to  be  followed,  and  if,  as  in  his 
time  was  almost  necessarily  the  case,  the  profession  of  the 
soldier  involved  such  acts,  a  sincere  Christian  could  have  no 
choice  but  to  resign  his  commission. 

(3.)  The  third  group  contains  those  writings  which  an' 
addressed  to  the  womenfolk  in  the  Christian  community. 
The  female  element  in  the  Church,  always  predominant, 
was  specially  conspicuous  at  Carthage  owing  to  the  promi- 
nent part  taken  by  women  in  social  life.  The  Eastern 
and  Western  worlds  were  in  nothing  more  distinct  than  in 
the  position  assigned  to  their  women.  Carthage  was  wholly 
Western,  in  some  respects  more  Roman  than  Rome  itself ; 
and  in  the  freedom  from  control  enjoyed  by  the  brilliant  and 
ambitious  ladies  who  led  her  fashions,  she  set  an  example 
of  the  new  order  of  things  which  Italian  and  Spanish  dames 
might  envy. 

Tertullian  gives  a  startling  picture  of  the  luxury,  the 
display,  the  extravagance,  the  all  but  compromising  laxity 
of  deportment  which  made  the  Carthaginian  ladies  the  theme 
alike  of  panegj^rist  and  satirist.  His  sketches,  warmly 
coloured  as  they  are,  do  not  go  beyond  those  of  Apuleius, 
Juvenal,  and  Seneca.  But  while  the  poet's  and  rhetorician's 
pencil  depicts  a  heathen  society,  the  preacher  is  drawing 
identically  the  same  designs  from  Christian  models.  Good 
old  Rhenanus  apologises  for  Tertullian's  unsparing  realism 
by  the  round  assertion,  "  Sexus  mulierum  in  luxum  valde  pro- 
pensus  est,  et  natura  philocosmos."  ^  Be  this  as  it  may,  it 
seems  certain  that  the  churchwomen  of  Carthage,  ignoring 
the  good  example  of  their  husbands  and  brothers,  who  dressed 
soberly  and  without  display,  vied  with  their  heathen  sisters 
in  every  kind  of  ostentation  and  amusement.  The  prosperity 
of  the  times  and  the  peace  of  the  Church  contributed  to  this 
result  It  must  have  been  highly  painful  to  a  moral  teacher 
to  see  his  choicest  arguments  rebutted  by  the  very  persons 

^  The  sex  is  extremely  addicted  to  luxury,  and  naturally  fond  of 
adornment. 


TERTULLIAN.  585 

to  whom  he  should  have  pointed  as  their  best  support. 
TertulHan  writes  like  one  who  had  lost  patience.  His  caustic 
wit  is  at  its  sharpest,  his  fiery  wrath  at  his  hottest,  as  he 
lashes  the  luxurious  habits  that  made  religion  a  sham  and 
the  Church  a  matrimonial  marki't.  But  if  he  lost  patience 
he  did  not  lose  heart.  In  none  of  his  writings  does  his  tone 
rise  higher,  in  none  is  his  appeal  more  stirring,  in  none  are 
his  pleadings  more  confidently  backed  by  faith  in  the  power 
of  his  cause.  Yet  the  result  was  far  from  encouraging. 
Whether  his  methods  were  unwise — for  he  lacked  that  genial 
sympathy  with  human  nature  which  is  stronger  than  any 
argument — or  whether  the  "dearly  beloved  sisters"  were 
really  obdurate,  his  later  addresses  are  even  more  severe  than 
his  early  ones,  and  the  latest  of  all  is  the  most  exacting  and 
repulsive. 

TertuUian's  nature  was  too  rhetorical  to  fit  him  for  the 
delicate  manipulation  of  consciences.  He  lacked  the  sense 
of  proportion,  which  gave  to  Jerome,  in  spite  of  his  acid 
temper  and  even  more  rigidly  ascetic  views,  such  unrivalled 
success  in  dealing  with  the  female  heart.  In  spite  of  his 
stern  consistency  of  life,  in  spite  of  his  intense  earnestness 
of  puq^ose,  we  fear  that  his  pamphlets  produced  little 
or  no  effect.  At  any  rate,  the  rebukes  of  Cyprian,  a 
generation  later,  though  couched  in  more  modest  language, 
fully  justify  the  unsparing  severity  of  his  great  master  and 
model. 

The  following  treatises  comprise  the  list  to  which  we  are 
alluding: — Dc  Cultu  Fcminarum,  in  two  drafts,  the  first 
unfinished,  and  probably  relinquished  from  a  sense  of  its  too 
great  vehemence  ;  the  second  practical  and  persuasive,  and 
ranking  among  the  best  of  his  shortci-  works ;  the  two 
letters  to  his  wife  {ad  Uxorcvi),  in  which  he  earnestly  dis- 
suades her  from  a  second  marriage  :  these  four  were  written 
during  his  Catholic  period.  Then  follow  among  his  ^lon- 
tanistic  works,  the  de  Exhortatione  Caslitatis,  de  Virginihus 
Velandis,  both  of  which  betray  a  lingering  afTection  for  the 
Church  he  had  left;  the  de  Monorjamia  and  the  dr  rudicitia, 
in  which  the  sour  precepts  of  the  schismatic  turn  into  gall 


\ 


586  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

and  wormwood  the  wholesome  admonitions  of  the  Christian 
moralist.  It  is  perhaps  unnecessary  to  give  any  separate 
account  of  these  writings.  It  will  be  enough  to  note  one 
or  two  of  their  most  characteristic  doctrines,  which  he 
enforces  with  the  whole  force  of  his  powers  and  the  entire 
armoury  of  his  scholarship. 

His  conception  of  the  relation  of  the  sexes,  and  more 
especially  of  the  nature  of  woman,  is  essentially  coarse, 
imperfect,  and  unscriptural.  Woman  is  regarded  in  the 
light  of  a  tempter  of  the  continence  of  man,  and  her  beauty 
as  a  snare  of  the  devil.  In  the  de  Hahitit  MiUiehri  he  uses 
these  words : — 

"  The  sentence  of  God  on  the  sex  remiiins  to  this  day  in  force ; 
therefore  the  guilt  that  provoked  it  remains.  Thou  (woman)  art 
the  gate  of  Satan,  thou  art  the  opener  of  the  fatal  tree,  the  first 
deserter  of  the  Divine  law  ;  thou  art  she  who  enticed  him  whom 
the  devil  dared  not  to  attack.  Thou  didst  thus  easily  break  God's 
image,  which  is  man.  For  thy  desert,  which  was  death,  the  Son 
of  God  was  obliged  to  die  :  and  yet  thou  hankerest  after  orna- 
ment, as  if  the  coat  of  skins  was  not  enougli  for  thee." 

"If  we  cannot  actually  condemn  beauty,'*  says  TertuUian, 
"  we  ought  to  fear  it.  To  boast  of  beauty  is  to  fall  into 
sin;  no  llesh  should  be  commended  but  the  lacerated  flesh 
of  the  martyr.  To  increase  one's  natural  charms  by  the  appli- 
ances of  art  is  to  depreciate  God's  creation.  Whatever  is  not 
formed  by  the  hand  of  God  is  not  only  unnecessary  but  harm- 
tul.  Sheep  do  not  grow  with  scarlet  fleeces,  fishes  do  not 
swim  in  purple  shells.  If  God  has  not  willed  to  form  these 
things,  it  was  because  He  did  not  wish  them  to  exist.^  Christ 
says,  *  Ye  cannot  make  one  hair  white  or  black.'  We  know 
better.  The  dark-tressed  African  maids  strive  to  reproduce 
the  golden  locks  of  Germany — a  sorry  augury  for  their 
future  in  the  next  world,  where  flaming  heads  of  hair  will  be 
a  reality  and  not  a  sliain."     Tlien  he  goes  on  : — 

'  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  argument  is  reproduced  at  the  present  day 
to  condemn  the  use  of  alcohol. 


TERTULLIAN.  587 

"  Do  you  expect  to  meet  Christ  on  the  resurrection  morn  with 
a  tower  of  false  hair?  Let  God  behold  you  now  as  you  hope 
He  will  behold  you  then.  Clotlie  yourselves  in  the  silk  attire 
of  purity,  the  fine  linen  of  riijhteousness,  the  purple  robe  of 
modesty.  Decorated  witli  these,  you  will  have  God  Himself  for 
your  Lover." 

His  conception  of  marriage  is  far  from  a  worthy  one. 
Sometimes,  indeed,  he  rises  to  the  height  of  the  Inspired  Word, 
and  in  one  truly  exquisite  passage  depicts  the  blessings  of 
Christian  wedlock  :  ^ — 

"  How  shall  I  sufficiently  express  the  blessedness  of  that  wed- 
lock which  the  Church  joins,  the  oblation  confh-ms,  whose  seal 
the  angels  witness,  and  the  Father  pronounces  valid  1  What  a 
bond  between  two  faithful  souls,  to  have  one  hope,  one  prayer, 
one  rule,  one  service !  Both  are  brethren,  both  are  fellow-ser- 
vants ;  no  division  of  flesh  or  spirit.  Together  they  pray,  together 
they  kneel,  together  they  fast,  guiding  each  other,  exhorting 
each  other.  These  are  one  in  the  Church  of  God,  one  in  the 
wedlock  of  God." 

But  he  cannot  maintain  this  point  of  view.  To  his  mind 
marriage  is  at  best  a  permitted  concession  to  the  infirmity  of 
the  flesh.  And  in  a  time  of  conflict  and  peril,  when  none  can 
tell  what  awful  catastrophe  may  be  impending  over  society, 
how  much  wiser  and  better,  he  argues,  to  steel  one's  senses 
against  all  earthly  delights,  and  keep  oneself  unfettered 
from  ties  that  may  probably  prove  a  curse.  The  desire  of 
children,  which  so  many  women  allege  as  their  motive  for 
entering  upon  marriage,  is  a  weakness  that  ought  to  be  over- 
come. What  are  children  but  the  bitterest  of  pleasures  ?  so 
much  so,  that  Christian  parents  are  only  anxious  that  their 
little  ones  should  go  before  them  into  heaven  and  escape  the 
pollutions  and  miseries  of  a  longer  life.  And  then  we  know 
that  affection,  once  let  loose,  cannot  be  controlled.  What 
if  a  Christian  woman  should  marry  a  heathen  husband, 
forgetful  of  the  Apostle's  injunction,  "  Only  in  the  Lord  "  ? 
This  was  no  chimerical  fear.    Such  cases  had  happened  again 

1  Ad.  rx.  ii.  ch.  v. 


588  LATIN   CHRISTIAXITV. 

and  again.     And  liow  impossible  it  was  that  in  such  circum- 
stances the  wife  should  continue  to  serve  the  Lord. 

*'  Is  a  meeting  for  prayer  appointed  ?  Her  husband  will 
propose  a  resort  to  the  bath.  A  fast  ?  He  will  have  a  feast 
instead.  A  procession  ?  Household  duties  will  forbid  it.  Besides, 
would  he  allow  her  to  f^o  from  house  to  house,  from  street  to 
street,  from  cabin  to  cabin,  to  visit  the  brethren  ?  Would  he 
permit  her  to  take  part  in  the  nightly  assemblies,  when  her  turn 
came?  Or  when  Easter  called  her  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
an  institution  which  they  suspect  ?  To  creep  to  the  prison  to  kiss 
the  chains  of  the  martyrs  ?  To  salute  the  brethren  ?  To  wash  the 
saints'  feet  ?  To  offer  them  hospitality  ?  To  minister  to  them  when 
sick?  Or  if  he  endured  these  tilings  in  silence,  what  else  would 
it  be  for,  but  to  treasure  up  the  means  of  revenging  himself  on 
her,  if  at  any  future  time  she  happened  to  provoke  him  ? " 

Such  were  the  considerations  which  induced  Tertullian, 
acting  as  they  did  on  a  mind  naturally  predisposed  to  solitude 
and  gloom,  to  discountenance  altogether  the  acceptance  of 
the  nuptial  bond.  He  does  not,  however,  go  so  far  as  to 
regard  marriage  as  an  evil  in  itself  ;  nor  is  he  so  extravagant 
in  his  praises  of  virginity  as  some  of  the  later  ascetics.  But 
on  one  point  he  is  inflexible.  A  second  marriage  is  adultery 
pure  and  simple.  No  Divine  Law  can  be  allowed  to  permit 
it.  K  certain  passages  of  Scripture  seem  to  countenance 
such  unions,  they  must  be  inteq^reted  by  the  general  sense 
of  Holy  Writ,  which  is  absolutely  against  them. 

The  Church  had  always  acknowledged  this  in  the  case  of 
priests  and  deacons.  It  was  never  laid  down  in  her  law 
that  a  priest  ought  not  to  have  contracted  a  second  marriage, 
but  always  that  he  co^dd  not.  The  injunction  is  found  among 
the  apostolical  canons,  and  is  referred  to  by  Theodosius  in 
his  decree  for  the  deposition  of  Irenaeus  of  Tyre.  Theodore 
of  Mopsuestia  is  the  first  to  impugn  the  enactment,  but  he 
does  so  entirely  on  d  jJviori  grounds.  He  objects  to  it,  and 
wishes  it  abrogated,  but  bears  witness  to  its  undisputed 
prevalence.  Tertullian  therefore  has  the  whole  sense  of  the 
Catholic  Church  with  him  in  asserting  the  unlawfulness  of 


TERTULLIAN.  589 

digamy  among  the  clergy.  But,  not  content  with  this,  he 
extends  the  prohibition  to  the  laity  also,  and,  carried  away 
by  his  Montanistic  zeal,  ridicules  those  who  would  venture 
to  restrict  it.  The  argument  of  the  orthodox,  that  what 
is  specially  prescribed  for  bishops  cannot  be  meant  to  be 
understood  universally,  he  thus  answers  : — 

"  What  He  prescribes  to  all,  does  He  not  prescribe  to  bishops 
also  ?  What  He  prescribes  to  bishops,  does  He  not  prescribe  to  all 
Christians  ?  Or  is  it  not  rather  true,  that  because  He  prescribes 
it  specially  to  bishops.  He  means  it  for  all  1  and  for  this  very 
reason,  because  He  prescribes  it  specially  to  bishops  ?  For  whence 
are  bishops  and  cleigy  drawn  ?  From  the  whole  body.  If  the 
whole  body  is  not  bound  to  monogamy,  how  can  the  clergy  be  so 
bound  ?  Must  you  create  an  order  of  lay  monogamists  out  of 
which  alone  the  clergy  can  be  chosen  ?  The  fact  is,  when  we 
exalt  and  plume  ourselves  against  the  clergy,  we  are  all  on  a 
level,  we  are  all  priests  the7i.  Christ  has. made  us  all  priests  to 
God.  But,  when  we  are  summoned  to  equal  responsibilities  with 
the  priesthood,  we  speedily  drop  our  vestments,  and  sink  to  our 
own  level." 

Enough  has  perhaps  been  extracted  from  these  interesting 
writings  to  show  both  the  strength  and  the  weakness  of  the 
writer.  In  his  zeal  for  purity,  for  example,  for  sincerity  of 
profession,  Tertullian  stands  on  the  highest  level  of  eccle- 
siastical greatness  ;  in  his  persistent  disregard  of  the  wise 
moderation  of  men  far  more  competent  to  deal  with  such 
matters  than  himself,  men  who  sought,  and  as  we  believe 
found,  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  their  difficult  de- 
cision, he  betrays  the  self-sufficient  pride  of  the  Puritan,  and 
the  harsh  anti-social  bias  of  the  revolutionary  schismatic. 

The  fourth  and  last  group  of  the  practical  treatises 
contains  three  somewhat  isolated  writings,  those  On  Patience, 
On  Penitence,  and  On  Fasting.  The  first  of  these  is  a  product 
of  his  earlier  and  better  period,  and  is  written  throughout 
in  a  truly  Christian  spirit.  It  may  bo  recommended  to  the 
student  as  the  fittest  wherewith  to  commence  the  study  of 
his  works.  Besides  much  thoughtful  reasoning  on  spiritual 
graces  in  general,  it  contains  a  truly  beautiful  panegyric  on 


590  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

this  particular  virtue,  wliich   recalls  the  style  of  the  later 
rhetoricians,  Christianised  and  purified  : — 

"Patience  satisfieth  Fuith,  <:^ui(leth  Peace,  assisteth  Charity, 
instructeth  Iluinility,  waiteth  for  Penitence,  setteth  her  mark 
upon  Confession,  ruleth  the  flesh,  preserveth  the  Spirit,  hridleth 
the  tongue,  restraineth  the  hand,  treadeth  temptations  under 
foot,  driveth  away  offences,  perfecteth  martyrdom,  consoleth  the 
poor,  ordereth  the  rich,  straineth  not  the  ^veak,  wasteth  not  the 
strong,  delighteth  the  believer,  inviteth  the  heathen,  commendetli 
the  servant  to  his  master,  the  master  to  God  ;  adorneth  the 
woman,  appro veth  the  man ;  is  loved  in  the  boy,  praised  in 
the  young  man,  respected  in  the  old ;  is  beautiful  in  either  sex, 
in  every  age.  Come  now,  let  us  describe  her  form  and  demeanour. 
She  hath  a  countenance  serene  and  mild,  a  forehead  smooth, 
contracted  by  no  wrinkle  of  grief  or  anger,  her  brows  evenly 
and  cheerfully  relaxed,  her  eyes  cast  down,  in  humility,  not  in 
melancholy.  Her  mouth  beareth  the  seal  of  honourable  silence. 
Her  colour  is  such  as  those  have  who  are  free  from  care  or 
crime.  Her  head  is  often  shaken  at  the  devil,  and  her  smile 
defieth  him.  For  the  rest,  her  clothing  about  her  bosom  is 
white  and  closely  fitted  to  the  body,  as  being  neither  puffed  out 
nor  ruflled.  For  she  sitteth  on  the  throne  of  that  most  kind  and 
gentle  Spirit,  who  is  not  in  the  gathering  of  the  whirlwind  nor 
in  the  blackness  of  the  cloud,  but  belongeth  to  the  soft  calm, 
clear  and  single,  such  as  Elias  saw  Him  at  the  third  time.  For 
where  God  is,  there  is  also  Patience,  His  foster-child."  ^ 

The  treatise  On  Penitence  also  belongs  to  Tei-tul Han's 
catholic  works,  and  deserves  equally  high  praise.  His 
analysis  of  the  Christian  grace  of  repentance,  as  distinct 
from  mere  reproach  of  conscience  or  remorse  on  the  one 
hand,  and  from  self-upbraiding  for  an  imprudence  on  the 
other,  is  worthy  of  careful  attention,  for  its  lesson  is  as 
appropriate  now  as  it  was  when  Tertullian  wrote.  The  grand 
result  of  his  arguments  is  the  announcement  that  penitence, 
to  secure  the  absolution  of  the  Church,  must  be  publicly  per- 
formed, and  having  been  once  allowed,  can  never  be  repeated. 
Though  he  presumes  not  to  limit  the  Divine  prerogative  of 

^  Chap.  XV. 


TERTULLIAN.  591 

pardon,  he  is  very  decided  in  limiting  that  of  the  Church. 
This  work  should  be  read  in  close  connection  with  that  on 
baptism,  as  each  explains  the  other.  The  evidence  he  gives 
of  the  enforcement  of  discipline  upon  offenders  is  important, 
and  his  crushing  retorts  upon  those  who  put  off  repentance 
till  they  have  done  sinning  are  still  highly  useful  to  preachers. 
It  is  almost  impossible  to  overrate  the  value  of  Tertullian  as 
a  guide  to  the  preacher.  His  works,  even  when  compara- 
tively dispassionate,  seem  to  presuppose  a  disaffected  or  in- 
different audience,  whom  he  strives  to  animate  with  the  zeal 
of  which  he  himself  is  full.  The  curious  doctrine  of  a  second 
baptism  (that  of  blood  in  martyrdom)  washing  away  post- 
baptismal  guilt  is  implied  in  his  argument  on  Exomologesis 
or  public  confession.  The  Eoman  doctrine  of  repeated  secret 
confession,  and  repeated  restoration  to  Church  privileges,  is 
not  merely  unknown  to  Tertullian,  but  would  have  been 
abhorrent  to  his  soul.  The  Christian  is  to  him  the  man  who 
lives  up  to  the  standard  of  Christianity,  and  if  he  falls  from 
that  standard,  he  is  no  longer  a  Christian.  Though  danger- 
ously near  to  sectarian  narrowness,  there  is  yet  an  eternal 
element  of  truth  in  this  view,  to  which  modern  laxity  would 
do  well  to  give  heed. 

There  remains  only  the  treatise  On  Fasting  (de  Jejuniis), 
written  avowedly  against  the  Psychics,  i.e.,  the  members  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  Like  the  dc  Fudicitia,  it  is  a  lament- 
able witness  to  the  decline  in  charity  and  largeness  of  heart 
which  schism  invariably  entails.  Except  to  the  theological 
student,  there  can  be  no  pleasure  in  reading  the  passionate 
attacks  upon  his  former  friends,  the  arrogant  assumption  of 
superior  enlightenment,  and  the  narrow  rules  of  sanctity, 
which  spoil  an  otherwise  able  and  vigorous  argument.  It 
is  clear  that  Tertullian  found  no  more  peace  in  the  Mon- 
tanistic  sect  than  he  had  found  in  the  wider  communion 
of  the  Church.  His  temper  was  restless,  dissatisfied  with 
the  actual,  and  unable  to  acquiesce  in  the  conditions  which 
Divine  providence  has  assigned  to  our  moral  progress  here 
on  earth. 

We  must  now  bid  farewell  to  tliis  truly  great  and   fruitful 


592  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

Church  Father.  If  the  reader  have  followed  us  througli  our 
somewhat  h'ligthy  criticism  of  his  works,  he  will  conclude 
that  in  TertuUian  we  have  given  to  us  by  God's  Holy  Spirit 
a  man  of  genuine  truth  and  courage,  inflamed  with  the 
prophetic  fire,  scorning  falsehood,  cowardice  and  hypocrisy: 
eloquent  among  the  eloquent,  learned  in  books,  though  with- 
out the  faculty  of  reducing  his  learning  to  a  few  illuminating 
principles ;  convinced  that  he  is  taught  of  God,  yet  lacking 
in  that  holy  warmth  of  affection  which  teaches  us  that  the 
Spirit  speaks  in  many  tones,  some  of  which  we  cannot  hope 
to  understand :  at  first  an  ardent  disciple,  next,  a  stern 
reformer,  and  then,  unable  to  endure  the  non-acceptance  of 
his  views,  transferring  his  allegiance  to  a  misguided  sectary, 
whom  in  the  flesh  he  knew  not,  and  whom,  had  he  known, 
it  is  impossible  to  believe  he  would  ever  have  honoured  by 
his  adherence ;  but,  once  converted,  throwing  himself  heart 
and  soul  into  his  new  alliance,  and,  by  his  powerful  advocacy, 
endowing  it  with  a  fresh  and  far  more  enduring  lease  of  life ; 
and  last  of  all  becoming,  in  his  old  age,  impracticable  and 
probably  dissatisfied  with  a  reality  that  belied  his  anticipa- 
tion, isolating  himself  still  further  by  forming  a  sect  within 
a  sect,  until  he  who  had  pleaded  so  nobly  for  the  unity  of  the 
Church  and  the  rule  of  Faith  gave  his  name  to  an  insignificant 
rabble  of  Tertullianists,  who  dragged  out  a  tolerated  existence 
in  Carthage  and  the  vicinity,  until  in  the  days  and  under  the 
influence  of  Augustine  they  once  more  returned  into  the  pale 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  He  died  in  extreme  old  age,  it  is 
uncertain  in  what  year,  but  probably  not  until  he  had  hoard 
the  edict  of  Alexander  Severus,  allowing  the  Cliristians  free- 
dom of  worshiji :  a  living  witness  to  the  fact  that  amid  all 
the  temptation  of  popular  clamour  and  his  own  fierce  and  re- 
])eated  challenges,  tlu^  heathen  authorities  were  not  so  unjust 
as  he  represented  them,  but  were  sometimes  willing  to  allow 
an  implacable  adversary  to  exist  among  them  unmolested, 
and  to  undermine  by  his  writings  the  edifice  on  which  their 
religion  and  tlieir  polity  were  alike  built. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

CYPRIAN  (A.i).  2oo?-2  57). 

Inferior  to  Tertullian  in  natural  genius  and  vehemence  of 
mind,  but  far  above  him  in  prudence,  moderation,  and  apti- 
tude for  practical  affairs,  Cyprian,  the  second  great  writer 
of  the  Carthaginian  Church,  now  comes  before  us.  As  in 
the  case  of  his  predecessor,  we  know  but  little  of  his  un- 
converted life.  It  is  clear,  however,  from  the  testimony  of 
Lactantius  and  Augustine,  as  well  as  from  the  tone  of  his 
own  writings,  that  he  was  a  man  of  education,  means,  and 
experience  in  public  life.  The  lofty  courtesy  of  his  address, 
combined  with  a  certain  air  of  unconscious  superiority,  seems 
to  point  to  aristocratic  birth.  He  followed  the  fashionable 
profession  of  a  master  of  rhetoric,  and  probably  also  of  an 
advocate  ;  and  such  was  the  esteem  in  which  his  character 
was  held  that  his  popularity  survived  the  usually  fatal  shock 
of  conversion  to  Christianity,  and  he  retained  the  respect  of 
his  early  heathen  associates  to  the  last. 

Both  the  place  and  date  of  his  birth  are  unrecorded.  His 
conversion  took  place  in  the  year  246,  and,  as  the  e\'idence 
clearly  points  to  his  being  at  that  fifne  in  the  full  vigour  of 
life,  we  may  not  improbably  suppose  him  to  have  been  born 
about  the  close  of  the  second  or  beginning  of  the  third 
century.  His  original  name  was  Thascius  Cyprianus,  but  at 
his  baptism  he  took  the  name  of  Ca3cilius  ^  from  an  aged 
presbyter  of  the  Cliurch  of  Carthage,  who  had  been  the  chief 
human  instrument  of  his  new  birth. 

When  once  admitted  into  the  Church,  his  rise  to  tin' 
highest  position  was  singularly  rapid.    The  question  has  been 

^  So  Jerome  ;  but  Cyprian's  rlietnrical  biop^raphcr  Pontius  calls  him 
CaDcilianus. 

593  2  r 


594  LATIN    CHRISTIANITY. 

raised  whether  he  served  in  the  diacuuate  before  his  eleva- 
tion to  the  priesthood.  There  is  no  direct  evidence  for  the 
fact ;  but  it  is  in  itself  highly  probable,  and  seems  to  be 
implied  by  the  statement  of  his  biographer  Pontius,  himself 
a  deacon,  that  he  was  "  one  of  us."  His  admission  to  the 
presbyterate  took  place  at  the  end  of  a.d.  247  ;  and  with  such 
liberality,  activity,  and  zeal  did  he  perform  its  sacred  duties 
that,  on  the  death  of  Donatus  in  tlie  following  year,  he  was 
demanded  by  the  voice  of  the  people,  with  the  concurrence 
of  the  greater  number  of  the  clergy,  to  succeed  liim  as  their 
bishop.  Though  unwilling  to  accept  the  hazardous  dignity, 
his  reluctance  was  overruled,  and  he  stands  forth  in  history 
with  Ambrose,  Athanasius,  and  Fabian,  as  one  of  those  in- 
stances in  which  the  congregation  instinctively  discerned  its 
ruler,  in  which  the  people's  voice  may  without  exaggeration 
be  called  the  voice  of  God.  His  election,  however,  was  not 
unanimous ;  there  existed  a  party  of  dissentients,  headed  by 
five  presbyters,  of  whom  the  well-known  Xovatus  was  one. 
These,  by  a  skilful  use  of  Cyprian's  mistakes,  and  an  adroit 
manipulation  of  favouring  circumstances,  were  able  to  oppose 
and  thwart  him  all  through  his  career.  Thus  his  episcopate, 
brilliant  as  it  was,  was  clouded  by  many  storms ;  but  his  clear 
judgment  and  indomitable  will  carried  him  safely  through 
them  all,  and  in  nearly  every  instance  brought  the  principles 
for  which  he  contended  to  a  triumphant  issue. 

l>efore  entering  into  a  consideration  of  the  conflicts  in 
which  this  great  prelate  engaged,  let  us  pause  a  moment  to 
sketch  the  salient  features  of  his  cliaracter. 

His  Character. 

By  nature  generous,  affable,  and  considerate  ;  by  education 
well  versed  in  the  best  literature,  and  himself  not  unworthy 
to  be  ranked  with  the  classic  masters  of  style ;  by  profession 
accustomed  to  grasp  the  points  of  a  case  and  make  them 
plain  to  others,  Cyprian  had  essentially  and  above  all  things 
a  statesman's  mind.  To  him  the  Churcli  was  a  polity,  divinely 
conceived  and  divinely  ordained,  but  meant  to  be  realised  and 


CYPRIAN.  595 

made  to  work  on  earth.  To  the  fulfilment  of  this  ideal 
he  brought  a  master-spirit,  self-reliant  and  autocratic,  which 
neither  feared  to  act  alone,  nor  shrank  from  influencing  or, 
if  need  were,  coercincr  others. 

But  his  was  no  mere  personal  ambition.  Immediately  on 
his  ordination  he  sold  his  large  estates  for  the  benefit  of  the 
poor.  They  were  indeed  repurchased  by  his  friends,  and  he 
did  not  think  it  needful  to  refuse  the  gift.  But  his  wealth 
was  always  used  for  charity,  never  for  his  own  aggrandise- 
ment. His  love  of  power,  which  was  great,  arose  from  his 
sense  of  responsibility.  He  was  fitted  to  command,  and  he 
knew  it ;  but  he  lived  and  acted  as  one  answerable  to  the 
Divine  Judge.  Of  a  high-strung  temperament,  he  believed 
himself  to  be  the  subject  of  special  intimations  from  Heaven, 
on  which  more  than  once  he  distinctly  rests  the  authority  of 
his  acts.  It  was  a  time  when  a  strong  hand  was  needed. 
Lax  in  discipline  and  cold  in  faith,  the  Church  of  Carthage 
still  showed  the  symptoms  of  decline  which  had  aroused 
Tertullian's  wrath.  Cyprian  set  himself  to  instruct  and 
reform  it.  If  his  strict  administration  brought  him  dislike, 
if  his  decisions  have  in  some  cases  been  reversed,  his  fame 
has  not  suffered  with  posterity.  Those  who  dissent  from  his 
views  admit  that  his  aim  was  single,  and  his  services  to  the 
Catholic  cause  untarnished  by  self-seeking.  As  an  adminis- 
trator and  organiser,  he  has  had  no  superior  and  but  few 
equals  among  Christian  bishops. 

His  chief  defect  is  want  of  spiritual  depth.  Though 
trained  in  philosophy,  and  able  to  handle  moral  (juestions 
with  freshness,  force,  and  beauty,^  his  theolog)^  lacks  tliat 
profound  sympathy  with  the  workings  of  the  human  spirit 
that  lends  to  tlie  writings  of  Augustine  so  enduring  a  charm. 
It  seeks  to  constrain  from  without,  not  from  within.  In  the 
application  of  Holy  Scripture  he  displays  a  controversial 
command  of  the  text  which  all  must  admire;  but  he  has 
been  charged,  not  without  justice,  of  mistaking  its  drift 
and  forcing  its  meaning.     As  compared  with  Tertullian,  he 

^  See  especially  his  tracts  on  Resentment,  Patience,  Envy,  ard  his 
treatment  of  the  theory  of  Probation. 


596  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

is  siiporior  in  orthodoxy,  but  less  massive,  less  intense,  less 
spiritually  great.  He  delighted  to  call  TertuUian  his  master, 
and  is  said  to  have  daily  studied  his  works.  This  close  study 
is  betrayed  by  frecjuent  imitation  not  only  of  his  arguments, 
but  of  his  language.  But  while  TertuUian  strives  to  sub- 
jugate the  will,  Cyprian  aiius  rather  at  dictating  the  course 
of  action.  Obedience  to  the  Church,  and  to  the  bishop  as  its 
mouthpiece,  such  is  his  watchword.  But  though  firm  and 
even  inflexible  in  this  demand,  he  is  singularly  temperate  in 
the  language  he  uses  to  enforce  it.  Except  in  one  instance,^ 
we  meet  with  no  unseemly  vehemence,  no  passion,  no  lapse 
from  self-control.  He  never  writes,  like  so  many  disputants, 
as  if  his  first  object  were  to  force  conviction  on  himself. 
All  is  clearly  laid  down,  and  calmly  urged.  The  letters  that 
passed  between  him  and  his  numerous  correspondents  read 
like  state-papers.  It  is  not  merely  the  training  of  the  advo- 
cate that  impresses  us,  but  the  dignity  of  a  clear  conscience 
and  a  judgment  sure  of  itself. 

At  the  same  time,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  Cyprian 
did  not  create  some  of  the  difficulties  that  beset  him  ;  or 
rather,  it  is  certain  that  he  did  create  them.  A  character 
so  dominant  must  under  any  circumstances  have  provoked 
opposition.  And  Cyprian's  lofty  view  of  a  bishop's  preroga- 
tive increased  this  inevitable  tendency.  Moreover,  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that  on  the  outbreak  of  persecution  he 
left  Carthage  for  a  securer  retreat,  thus  laying  his  motives 
open  to  misconstruction,  and  giving  his  enemies  a  freer  hand. 
We  need  not  doubt  that  his  own  explanation  of  his  conduct 
is  sincere,  nor  that  he  was  justified  in  his  prudent  course ; 
but  the  withdrawal  of  the  captain  from  the  scene  of  danger, 
as  Cyprian  must  have  known,  could  not  fail  to  furnish  a 
strong  weapon  to  his  opponents.  It  argues  no  small  moral 
courage  to  resolve  on  such  a  stt^]^  and  no  mean  dialectical 
skill  to  defend  it.  That  Cyprian  not  only  did  this  with 
success,  but  retained  his  hold  upon  the  loyalty  of  his  diocese 
during  fourteen  months  of  absence,  under  circumstances  of 

1  Tlic  letter  to  Pnpianus.  in  wliicli  Cyprian  seems  to  forget  himself; 
but  it  stands  quite  alone  in  this  respect. 


CYPRIAN.  597 

unexampled  difficulty,  is  perhaps  the  best  vindication  of  his 
conduct  in  leaving  it. 


Controversies  in  which  he  took  part. 

(i.)  The  Lapsed. 

We  must  now  return  to  the  circumstances  of  his  life. 
The  Decian  persecution  began  with  the  edict  of  A.D.  249. 
It  was  aimed  specially  against  the  leaders  of  the  Church. 
Fabian  of  Home  was  the  first  to  suffer,  leaving  the  Koman 
Church  long  without  a  head.  Cyprian,  warned  as  he  tells 
us  by  a  Divine  sign,  retired  before  the  storm.  He  probably 
thought  to  divert  its  fury,  but  in  this  he  was  mistaken. 
The  prefects  were  ordered,  under  heavy  threats,  to  put  the 
severest  pressure  upon  the  worshippers  of  Christ.  The 
Church  was  in  no  condition  to  meet  the  danger.  Every 
order  was  tainted  with  laxity ;  the  laity  were  luxurious,  the 
clergy  covetous;  the  demands  of  religion  seemed  easy,  its 
advantages  were  great.  The  fraternity  was  connected  by  the 
closest  ties ;  its  numbers  were  large,  its  profession  fashion- 
able. When  the  trial  came,  the  majority  fell  beneath  it. 
A  day  was  fixed  on  or  before  which  Christianity  must  be 
renounced.  So  eager  was  the  desire  to  escape  the  martyr's 
fate  that  the  magistrate's  chair  was  thronged  with  crowds 
volunteering  to  sacrifice.  Those  who  refused  were  banished 
or  shut  up  in  prison,  but  they  were  few  out  of  many.  The 
guilty  were  graduated  according  to  the  measure  of  their  guilt 
Those  who  complied  at  once,  those  who  after  a  long  struggle 
walked  to  the  altar,  those  who  yielded  ouly  to  torture,  were 
classed  apart.  They  were,  however,  all  branded  by  the  name 
of  Sacrificati  or  Thurificati,  according  as  they  had  sacrificed 
or  merely  sprinkled  incense  l)efore  Cassar's  iuiage. 

Another  class  of  apostates  were  those  called  Lihcllatici  or 
certificate-holders.  The  authorities  were  not  unwilling  to 
spare  the  feelings  as  well  as  the  persons  of  Christian  pro- 
fessors, provided  they  were  paid  for  their  considerateness. 
It  was  understood  that  certificates  of  subscription  {lihdli) 


598  LATIN    CHRISTIAXIT\'. 

could  be  purchased,  to  hold  one  of  which  it  was  not  neces- 
sary to  appear  and  offer  sacrifice.  This  ingenious  method 
of  avoiding  danger  without  touching  the  accursed  thing  was 
greatly  appreciated.  The  scale  on  which  business  was  trans- 
acted was  highly  remunerative,  and  many  of  the  purchasers 
were  members  of  the  priesthood.  They  evidently  hoped  to 
remain  undiscovered,  or  at  any  rate  to  slip  back  without 
question  in  quieter  times.  But  they  had  miscalculated.  The 
constancy  of  the  faithful  few  under  torture  and  death  had 
awakened  the  conscience  of  all.  The  confessors,  languish- 
ing in  prison,  were  visited  by  crowds  of  weaker  brethren, 
whom  they  encouraged,  comforted,  or  rebuked.  A  higher 
public  opinion  sprang  up.  The  heinousness  of  this  cowardly 
compromise  was  admitted,  though  Cyprian,  with  his  imperfect 
spiritual  discernment,  shows  more  indulgence  to  a  lihcllatic 
than  to  one  who  under  torture  had  offered  sacrifice.  His 
appreciation  of  the  martyr's  example  is  untinged  by  a  spark 
of  jealousy;  he  writes  letters  full  of  ardent  paneg}'ric  to 
those  whose  constancy  had  purified  the  Church. 

In  the  meantime  the  emperor's  attention  was  diverted  by 
difficulties  on  the  frontier.  The  persecution,  deprived  of  its 
instigator,  abated ;  and  the  Church  had  leisure  to  reflect 
upon  its  lessons.  The  general  falling  away,  which  Cy]orinn 
had  likened  to  a  mass  of  ruins,  was  in  his  opinion  due  to  an 
imperfectly  enforced  religious  standard.  And  this  opinion  was 
shared  by  the  Church  at  large.  Her  ranks  must  be  reformed, 
and  steady  discipline  must  prepare  for  decisive  victory.  In 
Italy  as  in  Africa  the  great  question  was,  how  to  deal  witli 
the  lapsed,  those  who  under  whatever  pretext  had  denied  the 
faith,  but  now  craved  readmission  to  the  Church's  peace  ? 

The  decision  of  this  (juestion  was  at  Carthage  complicated 
by  two  difficulties.  In  tlie  first  place,  the  martyrs  had  used 
with  much  freedoiu  their  undisputed  privilege  of  recommend- 
ing the  restoration  of  penitents  to  communion,  and  the 
confessors  had  followed  their  lead.  But  they  had  not  been 
content  with  merely  recommending;  they  had  actually  re- 
admitted to  communion  without  the  sanction  of  the  bishop, 
a  distinct  breach  of  prerogative.    In  the  second  place,  a  body 


CYPRIAN.  599 

of  factious  presbyters,  hostile  to  Cyprian's  authority,  had 
practised  on  the  simplicity  of  the  martyrs  and  confessors, 
and  induced  them  by  flattery  to  extend  their  indulgence  to 
unworthy  persons.  Cyprian  met  the  difficulty  with  his  usual 
clear-sighted  courage.  While  admitting  the  martyrs'  royal 
prerogative  of  pardon,  he  laid  down  as  indispensable  its 
ratification  by  the  bishop.  He  threw  the  chief  blame  on 
those  presbyters  and  deacons  who  had  led  the  martyrs  into 
unconstitutional  acts,  and  while  not  excusing  the  latter,  he 
threatened  to  suspend  the  former  from  their  ofiice  unless 
they  changed  their  conduct. 

The  statesmanlike  qualities  of  the  bishop's  mind  are  well 
brought  out  in  this  controversy.  By  natural  disposition  he 
was  inclined  to  rigour.  By  the  provocation  of  the  party 
opposed  to  him,  this  natural  inclination  would  be  still  further 
stimulated.  By  the  lamentable  defection  of  so  many  of  its 
members  the  Church  might  seem  compelled  to  be  severe. 
But  Cyprian  took  a  broad  view  of  the  situation.  He  laid 
down  two  great  principles,  which  have  held  good  in  such 
cases  ever  since.  The  first  is  that  the  proper  minister  of 
reconciliation  is  the  bishop,  who  alone  has  dispensing  power ; 
the  second  is  that  whatever  tlie  decision  of  the  Church  as  to 
accepting  or  rejecting  a  lapsed  member,  such  decision  can 
in  no  way  prejudge  the  Divine  award.  By  keeping  these 
principles  clearly  in  the  foreground,  he  meets  the  arguments 
of  his  opponents.  The  object  of  the  martyrs  and  confessors 
was  at  bottom  a  holy  and  merciful  one,  viz.,  to  assure 
penitent  sinners  of  the  Divine  pardon ;  but  it  was  mingled 
with  a  more  earthly  desire  to  display  their  influence  and  to 
be  known  as  friends  of  the  unfortunate.  They  meant  no 
direct  disloyalty  to  the  bishop  ;  but  were  induced  to  risk  such 
disloyalty  as  a  thing  of  secondary  importance  comj^ared  with 
the  good  effects  of  their  intervention.  To  them  Cyprian's 
argument  is  directed,  that  even  though  an  occasional  hard- 
ship may  be  inflicted  by  keeping  to  the  Church's  rule,  this 
does  not  in  any  way  prejudice  the  Divine  power  to  pardon. 
The  factious  presbyters,  on  the  contrary,  set  before  them  as 
their  chief  object  tlie  diminution  of  Cyprian's  authority.     The 


6oo  LATIN    CHRISTIANITY. 

discipline  of  the  Church  and  the  consolation  of  the  penitent 
were  less  near  their  heart  than  the  extension  of  their  own 
influence.  Hence  they  made  the  confessors  their  instru- 
ments in  flooding  the  Church  with  a  large  body  of  returned 
"lapsed,"  of  whose  adherence  to  their  party  in  any  future 
disputes  they  might  feel  secure.  To  all  their  specious  pleas 
for  charitable  action,  the  clear  enunciation  of  the  bishop's 
undoubted  prerogative  was  a  sufficient  reply. 

Subject  to  these  two  limitations,  Cyprian  was  not  averse 
to  a  merciful  treatment  of  the  lapsed.  His  directions  on  the 
subject  are  in  striking  contrast  to  the  rigorist  views  which 
Novatian,  the  schismatical  bishop  of  Home,  endeavoured 
under  the  influence  of  Novatus  ^  to  thrust  upon  that  Church. 
He  first  laid  down  in  clear  language  the  different  degrees  of 
guilt,  and  apportioned  to  each  its  corresponding  penance  ; 
and  then  directed  that  the  main  body  of  cases  should  await 
his  return,  which  he  hoped  might  not  be  deferred  beyond  the 
following  Easter  (a.d.  251),  while  such  as  were  urgent,  as  of 
those  who  were  sick  or  otherwise  in  danger  of  their  lives, 
might  be  dealt  with  at  the  discretion  of  the  presbyters.  A 
large  and  highly  interesting  portion  of  his  letters  is  con- 
cerned with  this  question,  and  the  matters  of  discipline 
connected  with  it.  On  comparing  his  views  with  those  of 
the  stern  and  unbending  Tertullian,  we  recognise  the  gentle- 
ness of  the  Christian,  as  well  as  the  prudence  of  the  man  of 
the  world,  and  the  sagacious  judgment  of  the  ruler. 

(2.)  The  Kebaptism  of  Hkketics. 

Another  controversy  which  agitated  the  Church,  and  in 
which  Cy])rian  took  a  still  more  leading  part,  was  that  of 
the  rebaptism  of  heretics  and  schismatics.  It  extended  over 
the  years  255  and  256  ;  and  to  a  most  able  and  exhaustive 
treatment  of  it  ho  devoted  some  of  his  longest  and  most 

'  Novatus  had  fomented  the  agitation  for  readmission  when  in  Cartliage  ; 
but  finding  Cyprijin's  influence  too  strong  for  liim,  had  found  his  way  to 
Rome,  and  there  with  glaring  inconsistency,  but  actuated  by  the  sanoe 
desire  of  thwarting  Cyprian,  had  attached  himself  to  the  opposite  views 
of  Novatian. 


CYPRIAN.  6oi 

important  letters.  In  a.d.  254,  the  rude  and  violent  Stephen 
was  elected  Bishop  of  the  Eoman  Church  ;  and  he  at  once 
adopted  a  policy  of  comprehension,  one  feature  of  which 
was  the  admission  of  heretics  to  communion  by  imposition 
of  hands  without  a  second  baptism.  The  question  was 
obviously  one  of  vital  importance  to  the  Church,  and  one  in 
which  uniformity,  if  it  could  be  secured,  was  highly  desirable. 
But  how  could  this  be  done  without  trenching  upon  the 
independence  of  the  individual  bishops  ?  The  only  authority 
recognised  by  all  would  have  been  an  Oecumenical  Council 
of  the  whole  Christian  world.  But  in  the  third  century, 
under  Pagan  emperors,  such  a  decision  was  impossible. 
Other  grounds  of  appeal  were  therefore  resorted  to  by  the 
disputants  on  both  sides.  Of  these,  apostolical  tradition. 
Scripture  proof,  and  local  custom,  were  the  strongest.  But 
as  the  two  former  were  doubtful,  and  the  latter  diverse,  it 
came  to  this,  that  the  individual  bishop  of  a  diocese,  or  the 
united  bishops  of  a  province,  generally  decided  for  them- 
selves. Both  the  Asiatic  and  African  custom  had  been 
against  accepting  the  baptism  of  heretics.  The  Eoman  seems 
to  have  been  in  favour  of  it.  At  first  the  controversy  was 
carried  on  by  friendly  letters,  but  it  soon  transformed  itself 
into  a  duel  between  Stephanus  and  Cyprian,  the  latter  being 
supported  by  all  the  bishops  of  his  province.  Into  the  his- 
tory of  this  great  conflict  it  is  beside  our  purpose  to  enter. 
It  will  be  sufficient  to  make  clear  to  the  reader  Cyprian's 
own  view,  which  he  formulated  in  answer  to  an  application 
from  eighteen  Numidian  bishops,  and  which  was  considered 
by  Stephanus  as  a  direct  challenge. 

In  contradistinction  from  many  other  disputes  which  have 
agitated  the  Church,  this  was  no  mere  question  of  words.  It 
was  a  clear  issue,  the  two  alternatives  of  which  were  incom- 
patible. Stephanus,  if  we  may  believe  Cyprian's  statement, 
was  willing  to  accept  all  heretical  ba])tism,  Cyprian  refused 
to  accept  any.  At  the  same  time,  he  would  not  have  ad- 
mitted himself  to  be  in  favour  of  rebaptism.  His  whole 
argument  was  built  on  the  assumption  that  tliere  is  but  one 
baptism,  that  of  the  Catholic  Churcli,  in  the  name  and  in 


6o2  LATIX    CHRISTIAXITV. 

the  faitli  of  the  Trinity.  In  his  view  the  fact  of  being 
outside  the  communion  of  the  Cliurch  was  an  absolute  bar. 
Whetlier  the  error  were  one  of  doctrine  or  of  discipline, 
whether  the  administrator  of  the  so-called  sacrament  were 
a  heretic  or  a  schismatic,  in  either  case  his  administration 
was  null  and  void.  Cyprian's  argument  is  clearness  itself. 
Neither  precedent  nor  custom,  nor  reliance  on  the  letter  of 
Scripture,  can  possibly  stand  against  the  reason  of  the  thing. 
If  Christ  entrusted  to  the  Church  and  to  no  other  body  the 
dispensing  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  was  impossible 
that  those  who  were  out  of  communion  with  the  Church 
could  dispense  that  gift.^  To  strengthen  his  hands,  Cyprian 
called  together  no  less  than  three  synods  of  African  bishops 
to  pronounce  on  this  question.  The  first  contained  thirty- 
three  bishops,  together  with  the  presbyters  of  Carthage.  The 
second  contained  seventy-one  bishops,  partly  Numidian  and 
partly  African,  who  sent  their  synodical  epistle  to  Stephanus, 
representing  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  entire  number. 
Stephanus  retaliated  by  circulating  in  the  East  a  paper 
in  which  he  declared  he  would  hold  no  communion  with 
churches  that  practised  rebaptism. 

This  manifesto,  which  breathed  the  very  spirit  of  the  Papal 
chair,  called  forth  from  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  a  remon- 
strance temperate  but  dignified,  which,  however,  produced 
no  effect.  Stephanus  was  as  inflexible  as  Cyprian,  and  the 
Church  of  Carthage  came  beneath  his  ban.  Cyprian  now 
proceeded  to  convene  his  third  Council,  which  met  at  Carthage 
in  A.I).  256.  iMghty-seven  bishops  front  the  provinces  of 
Numidia,  Mauretania,  and  Africa  voted,  and  a  vast  concourse 
of  presljyters  and  laity  attended  the  debate.  Cyprian's  open- 
ing speech  was  marked  by  breadth  and  moderation.  He  does 
not  seek  to  impose  the  views  of  the  Council  upon  the  whole 
Church,  since  he  fully  recognises  the  diversity  of  precedent 
and  the  absence  of  oecumenical  authority;  but  h(»  claims  for 
every  bishop  the  right  to  judge  for  himself,  and  altogether 
denies  the  right  of  the  IJoman  bishop  to  exclude  from 
communion   those  who  differed  from   liimself.      'i'he  entire 

»    Ep.  IXK. 


CYPRIAN.  603 

Council  was  unanimous;  and  the  expressions  of  its  opinion 
are  happily  preserved.  Some  of  the  suffrages  contain  argu- 
ment, others  only  assertion ;  but  the  aggregate  result  affords 
a  high  testimony  to  the  capacity  and  conscientiousness  of 
the  assembled  prejates,  and  the  moral  (effect  of  so  large  a 
concensus  of  opinion  must  have  been  immense. 

The  final  decision  of  the  whole  Church  was  not  given  till 
the  Council  of  Aries  (a.d.  314).  The  position  then  taken 
was  to  some  extent  a  compromise,  but  on  the  whole  it  may 
be  considered  adverse  to  Cyprian's  view.  It  affirmed  the 
validity,  though  not  the  lavjfidness,  of  schismatical  baptism ; 
it  accepted  the  baptism  of  such  heretics  as  were  orthodox  in 
respect  of  the  Trinity,  and  used  the  words  of  Christ's  institu- 
tion;  but  set  aside  the  baptism  of  those  that  denied  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  or  neglected  to  use  Christ's  words  of 
institution,  as  both  invalid  and  unlawful. 

The  error  of  Cyprian  was  one  of  judgment,  not  of  prin- 
ciple. It  arose  from  that  characteristic  of  his  mind  which 
led  him  not  only  to  connect  the  spiritual  grace  of  baptism 
with  the  appointed  channel  of  it,  but  absolutely  to  limit  its 
conveyance  to  that  channel,  thus  throwing  into  the  back- 
ground the  supreme  truth  that  Christ  Himself  is  the  Giver 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that  the  Church  exists  in  order  to 
provide  for  this  grace  being  duly  given,  not  that  she  may 
deny  it  to  those  who  in  genuine  faith  and  in  Christ's  words, 
though  not  in  the  regular  way,  invoke  it  in  His  Name.  His 
decision  was  the  result  of  a  single-minded  zeal  for  the  honour 
of  the  sacrament ;  it  was  endorsed  by  every  bishop  of  his 
province ;  though  erroneous,  it  was  more  truly  catholic  than 
that  of  his  opponent,  for  Stephen's  attitude  seems  one  of  policy 
rather  than  of  principle.  But  it  is  a  striking  instance  of  the 
spiritual  danger  of  too  external  a  conception  of  heavenly 
things;  and  while  we  pay  a  just  tribute  of  admiration  to  his 
courage,  his  consistency,  and  his  persuasive  power,  we  recog- 
nise the  higher  wisdom  and  the  diviner  charity  which  enabled 
the  Church,  without  any  sacrifice  of  truth,  to  vindicate  the 
free  action  which  Christ  claimed  for  the  Spirit.^ 
1  S.  John  iii.  8. 


6o4  LATIX   CHRISTIAXITV. 

His  Writing's. 

,  As  a  writer,  Cyjoriau  stands  very  liigli.  His  genuine  worlds 
consist  of  several  short  treatises  and  eighty-one  letters,  in- 
cliuling  some  from  his  numerous  correspon(]ents.  The  objects 
of  most  of  the  former  and  all  the  latter  were  practical.  The 
elegance  of  their  style  and  literary  form  makes  them  inte- 
resting to  the  student,  independently  of  their  great  historical 
value.  The  language  is,  indeed,  somewhat  artificial.  A 
mixed  diction,  in  which  poetical  phrases  and  idioms  were 
interwoven  with  the  ordinary  prose  style,  had  become  the 
established  vehicle  of  composition.  But  Cyprian  must  be 
judged  by  the  standard  of  his  age,  and  from  this  stand- 
point he  deserves  the  highest  praise.  His  most  polished 
effort  is  the  treatise  on  the  Grace  of  God,  addressed  shortly 
after  his  baptism  to  his  friend  Donatus.  It  embodies  in 
powerful  terms  his  experience  of  the  transforming  effects  of 
the  sacrament : — 

"  So  entirely  was  1  immersed  (he  says)  in  the  deadly  at- 
mosphere of  my  former  life,  so  enveloped  in  the  habits  and 
commission  of  sin,  that  I  despaired  of  ever  freeing  myself,  and 
began  to  look  upon  these  things  and  love  them  as  a  part  of 
myself.  But  when  the  sulliage  of  my  past  iniquities  was  washed 
away  by  tlie  waters  of  Ijaptism,  the  pure  and  serene  light  from 
above  infused  itself  into  my  whole  spirit.  When  my  second 
birth  of  the  Spirit  had  formed  in  me  a  new  man,  all  at  once  what 
had  been  duul)tful  before  became  certain  :  wliat  had  been  shut 
was  opened  ;  into  the  darkness  light  shined  ;  that  was  easy  which 
before  was  difficult,  and  that  only  difficult  which  before  was 
impossi])le;  and  now  1  knew  that  that  was  earthly  and  mortal 
which  had  formerly  included  nie  in  the  bondage  of  sin,  but  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  of  God  hatl  animated  me  witli  a  new  and  bettor 
nature.'  ^ 

We  have  only  to  read  this  I'arly  tract  with  the  subsequent 
history  before  our  mind,  to  ap])reciate  the  consistency  with 
which  Cyprian  wrought  out  into  the  sphere  of  Church  politics 
the  conclusions  of  this  his  first  Christian  argument. 
'  Poole's  tnuislation. 


CYPRIAN.  605 

Another  work  that  belongs  to  the  same  period  is  the 
three  books  of  Scripture  Proofs  against  the  Jews  (Testi- 
monia  adversus  Judacos).  He  here  supplies  a  large  and  well- 
arranged  body  of  texts  for  controversial  use.  llis  familiarity 
with  Scripture  from  the  very  commencement  of  his  career  is 
strikingly  shown,  though  his  application  of  it  does  not  go 
beyond  the  ordinary  commonplaces  of  such  controversy,  and 
betrays  the  training  of  the  special  pleader. 

His  essays  on  general  subjects  are  very  readable,  and 
should  be  compared  by  the  student  with  those  of  TertuUian 
and  those  of  Seneca.  They  are  inferior  to  the  former  in 
depth,  and  to  the  latter  in  brilliancy  and  point;  but  more 
tasteful  than  either.  Such  are  the  tracts  "  On  the  Vanity  of 
Idols  "  (Quod  idola  dii  11011  siiit),  "  On  the  Dress  of  Virgins  " 
{De  hahitu  virgimim),  "  On  Works  and  Alms "  {De  oinre  et 
eleemosynis),  "On  Patience"  {De  hono  imtientice),  "On  Zeal 
and  Envy"  {Dc  zdo  et  livore).  An  important  paper  "On 
the  Lapsed"  was  addressed  by  him  to  the  Church  of  Car- 
thage after  the  persecution  had  ceased.  Its  tone  is  lofty 
and  authoritative.  He  does  not  hesitate  to  assert  that  the 
discipline  of  pain  was  required  for  the  purification  of  the 
Christian  body;  and  he  appeals  to  his  own  denunciations 
and  warnings  as  having  long  before  emphasised  this  neces- 
sity. It  is  in  this  pamphlet  that  Cyprian,  with  admirable 
sense,  vindicates  the  claim  of  such  as  retired  before  the 
persecution  to  be  considered  true  confessors.  The  passage 
is  worth  quoting  : — 

"  Let  no  one  (he  says)  detract  from  their  glory,  or  weaken 
by  malignant  depreciation  the  firmness  of  those  who  still  stand 
upright.  For  when  the  day  fixed  by  the  authorities  had  passed, 
then  every  one  who  had  not  come  forward  to  sacrifice  virtually 
professed  himself  a  Christian.  No  doubt  the  chief  meed  of  victory 
is  with  those  who  under  the  hands  of  the  Gentiles  made  con- 
fession of  Christ ;  but  the  second  grade  of  distinction  ])elongs  to 
those  who  by  a  cautious  withdrawal  reserved  themselves  for  God's 
service.  The  one  confessed  in  public,  the  other  in  private :  the 
one  overcame  the  judge  of  tliis  world,  the  other,  content  with 
God  as  their  Judge,  guarded  a  pure  conscience  in  tlie  integrity  of 


6o6  LATIN    CHRISTIANITY. 

their  heart :  the  one  showed  the  readier  courage,  tlie  other  the 
more  careful  solicitude."  ^ 

The  strong  good  sense  of  this  advice  was  emphasised  by 
his  own  example.  Ready  for  death,  if  death  came  in  the 
way  of  duty,  he  was  wholly  opposed  to  that  passionate  thirst 
for  martyrdom  which  is  so  strange  a  symptom  of  that  un- 
happy age.  To  those  who  chose  it  as  the  best  gift  they  could 
render  to  God,  he  was  more  than  just :  without  a  trace  of 
jealousy,  he  exhausts  the  powers  of  his  style  in  doing  them 
honour,  and  when  he  thought  the  hour  had  come,  he  himself 
gladly  followed  their  lead. 

Owing  to  the  machinations  of  his  enemies,  his  return 
was  delayed  for  some  months ;  but  in  the  early  summer  of 
251  all  obstacles  were  overcome,  and  his  reception  was  so 
genuinely  enthusiastic  as  fully  to  repay  him  for  his  long 
and  anxious  time  of  waiting.  He  was,  however,  speedily  in- 
volved in  the  disputes  with  Novatian,  in  which  the  question 
of  the  lapsed  was  closely  connected  with  that  of  Novatian's 
schismatical  episcopate.  This  period  is  signalised  by  the 
calling  together  of  the  First  Council  of  Carthage,  an  event  of 
high  importance  in  the  history  of  the  Church.  For  although 
Councils  and  Synods  had  met  from  the  earliest  times  both  in 
East  and  West,  there  had  been  no  decisive  enunciation  of  the 
principle  of  Church  government  logically  involved  in  them. 
It  was  reserved  for  CjT^rian  by  his  strong  and  boldly-defined 
policy  to  bring  out  the  full  significance  of  these  great 
asseiublies,  and  by  the  frequency  of  their  employment  to 
familiarise  the  Church  with  their  action ;  so  that  when,  two 
generations  later,  outward  circumstances  at  length  allowed 
them  full  scope,  their  power  was  already  felt  and  their  pre- 
rogative recognised.  'J'he  treatise  in  which  Cyprian's  scheme 
of  Church  polity  is  embodied  is  the  celebrated  essay  *'0n 
the  Unity  of  the  Church  "  (in  its  original  form  an  address  to 
bishops),  which  is  the  greatest  of  all  his  writings,  and,  in 
proportion  to  its  bulk,  one  of  the  most  influential  documents 
in   the    world.     Its  argument,  though    copiously  illustrated, 

^  Chap.  iii. 


CYPRIAN.  607 

is  simple  and  uniform.  It  is  directed  primarily  against  the 
double  schism  which  rent  the  Roman  and  African  churches. 
But  the  treatment  is  based  on  first  principles,  and  is  there- 
fore applicable  to  every  age  of  Christianity.  Cyprian  takes 
it  for  granted  that  schism  is  in  itself  an  evil.  The  modern 
view  had  not  yet  arisen,  that  amid  the  clash  of  jarring  sects 
the  voice  of  truth  is  most  plainly  heard.  Hence  he  has  no 
misgiving  wlien  he  confronts  the  fact  of  schism  with  the 
ideal  of  unity,  and  pronounces  the  one  evil  and  the  other 
good.  To  him  the  spiritual  union  of  believers  in  Clirist  is 
not  to  be  conceived  apart  from  the  visible  communion  of 
Christ's  Church.  Tiie  ideal  Unity  includes  the  Church  in 
heaven  and  the  Church  on  earth;  but  the  second  must  be 
a  faithful  copy  of  the  first.  The  actual  unity,  therefore,  is 
^vith  him  no  mere  mechanism,  no  mere  sentiment,  no  mere 
as^Diration,  but  a  Sacrament,  that  is,  a  divinely-appointed 
visible  sign  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace.  We  need 
not  here  criticise  the  theological  aspect  of  this  view.  But 
the  boldness  and  the  power  of  it  are  at  once  a^Dparent.  The 
language  in  which  he  states  the  Scriptural  warrant  for  it  is 
remarkable,  and,  strange  to  say,  less  clearly  expressed  than 
is  his  wont :  ^ — 

"  Addressing  Peter,  the  Lord  saith,  '  /  say  unto  tliee,  thou 
art  Peter^  and  upon  this  rock  I  toill  build  My  Church,  and  the 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it :  and  to  thee  will  I  give 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven;  and  ivhatsoever  thou  shall  hind 
on  earth  shall  he  hound  in  heaven  also;  and  whatsoever  things 
thou  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  he  loosed  in  heaven  also.'  And 
again  to  the  same  (Peter)  He  saith  after  His  resurrection, 
'  Feed  My  sheep.'  He  builds  His  Church  upon  one  (and  commits 
His  sheep  to  him  to  be  fed).  And  although  he  committed  au 
equal  power  to  all  the  Apostles,  saying,  '  As  My  Father  hath  sent 
Me,  so  send,  I  you :  receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost.  Whose  soever  sins  ye 
remit,  they  shall  he  remitted  unto  them  ;  whose  soevei'  sins  ye  retain, 

^  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  a  mind  so  practical  as  Cyprian's  was 
sensible  of  the  turn  that  could  be  given  to  his  ar<,mmciit  by  the  advocate 
of  complete  ccntnilisation.  In  point  of  pure  logic,  Cyprian's  reasoning  is 
good ;  but  in  view  of  the  tendencies  of  human  affairs,  it  served  but  to 
defeat  its  own  original  purpose. 


6o8  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

tJiey  shall  he  rrfaiTutl .- '  yet,  for  the  exeniplilication  of  unity,  He 
so  disposed  by  His  authority  the  original  of  that  unity,  that  it 
miglit  rise  from  one.  The  rest  of  the  Apostles  were,  indeed, 
what  Peter  was ;  endow^ed  with  an  equal  fellowship  both  of 
dignity  and  power;  yet  the  beginning  proceeds  from  unity,  that 
the  Church  may  l)e  sliown  to  be  one."  ^ 

We  see  from  this  passage  that  Cy|:)rian  declared  Peter  to 
be  the  ti/pc  of  union,  but  he  is  silent  as  to  his  being  the 
centre  or  the  instrument  of  union.  What,  then,  in  his  view 
is  the  earthly  instrument  of  union  ?  He  tells  us  plainly,  The 
Episcopate ;  which  is  a  whole  in  itself,  one  and  undi\nded ; 
but  each  bishop,  like  the  shareholder  in  a  joint-stock  company, 
so  shares  in  it  as  to  have  a  direct  interest  in  the  whole.^ 

This  acute  and  masterly  definition  of  the  bishop's  right  in 
the  Church  is  practically  the  basis  of  the  Anglican  theory, 
as  distinct  on  the  one  hand  from  the  mechanical  centralisa- 
tion of  the  Papac}',  and  on  the  other  from  the  sentimental 
vaGfueness  of  Latitudinarianism  and  Dissent.  It  forms  the 
keystone  of  Cyprian's  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  was  the  root- 
principle  for  which,  at  the  risk  of  the  charge  of  imperiousness, 
he  contended  with  unflinching  %4gour. 

It  involved  the  supremacy  of  each  bishop  within  his  own 
diocese,  and  his  independence  of  all  external  jurisdiction  in 
all  decisions  not  contrary  to  Scripture  or  the  apostolic  tradi- 
tion. But  it  required  to  be  supplemented  by  a  second 
principle,  which  is  really  an  extension  of  itself.  The  epis- 
copate represents  not  only  a  unity  but  a  solidarity  of  power. 
Thus,  in  order  to  eliminate  the  fallible  element  of  individual 
judgment,  it  is  necessary  to  ascertain  the  combined  judgment 
of  the  entire  episcopate  of  the  Church  in  matters  where  the 
whole  Church  is  affected.  Hence  Cyprian's  instinctive  states- 
manship led  him  from  the  first  to  rely  on  the  General  Council 
as  the  paramount  instrument  of  union.  He  himself  presided 
at  no  less  than  seven  such  councils;  and  although  these 
assemblies  were  but  partially  representative,  including  either 
the  province  in  which  he  was  metropolitan,  or  two  or  at  the 

'  Poole's  translation. 
-  "Episcopatus  unus  est,  cuius  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tenet ur." 


CYPRIAN.  609 

most  three  of  the  provinces  which  made  up  the  African 
Church,  and  although  their  decisions  were  only  of  force 
within  the  limits  of  their  respective  jurisdictions,  yet  the 
principle,  once  established,  was  obviously  of  wider  applica- 
tion, and,  so  soon  as  the  empire  was  made  Christian,  became 
naturally  the  embodiment  of  the  Supreme  Authority  of  the 
Church. 

Of  Cyprian's  other  works,  that  "  On  the  Mortality  of  the 
Great  Plague  "  will  be  read  with  the  greatest  interest.  It 
is  a  terrible  picture  of  devastation  and  misery,  enhanced  by 
the  inhuman  indifference  ^ith  which  the  heathen  left  their 
brethren  to  perish  alone  and  unattended.  But  it  has  also 
its  brighter  side.  In  accents  of  burning  eloquence  Cyprian 
calls  upon  the  Christian  fraternity  to  rise  to  the  height  of 
their  holy  calling,  and  to  show  by  good  works  the  reality 
of  their  faith.  This  they  did  right  nobly,  and  by  their  self- 
denying  labours  not  only  soothed  the  prevailing  terror,  but 
did  good  service  to  their  Master's  cause. 

Cyprtan  has  also  left  an  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
probably  one  of  his  earlier  works,  and  not  distinguished  by 
any  special  merit.  His  frequent  quotations  from  the  old 
Latin  translation  of  the  New  Testament  are  of  value  to  the 
scholar  as  giving  information  as  to  the  comparative  antiquity 
of  disputed  readings. 

We  must  not  omit  to  notice  the  pamphlet  addressed  to 
Demetrianus,  a  professor  of  rhetoric  and  opponent  of  the 
Gospel,  which  contains  some  of  his  most  valuable  thoughts. 
It  deals  with  the  common  argument  that  the  decrepitude  of 
the  world  and  the  decay  of  society  were  to  be  ascribed  to  the 
wrath  of  the  gods  against  the  Christian  "  atheists."  Cyprian 
admits  the  premises,  but  denies  the  conclusion.  In  a  passage 
of  singular  descriptive  power,  he  shows  that  the  cycle  of 
nature  and  of  humanity  must  inevitably  draw  to  its  close ; 
but  the  lesson  he  draws  from  it  is  that,  while  there  is  yet  ^ 
time,  the  heathen  should  turn  to  the  true  God,  and  find  that 
deliverance  from  the  impending  catastrophe  which  the  Chris- 
tians have  already  received.  From  this  he  is  led  to  work  out 
the  thought  that  human  life  is  essentially  a  probation,  whicli, 

2  Q 


6io  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

familiar  as  it  is  to  us,  was  perhaps  never  before  so  clearly 
comprehended  and  so  forcibly  stated. 

Cyprian,  however,  only  applies  this  theory  as  between 
those  without  and  those  within  the  fold.  Its  extension  to 
indicate  a  process  within  the  Church  itself,  whereby  the 
Divine  purpose  of  salvation  is  confirmed  in  some  of  its  mem- 
bers and  negatived  in  the  rest,  though  perhaps  implicit  in 
his  system,  was  not  contemplated  by  him.  It  arose  in  the 
time  of  Augustine,  when,  owing  to  the  decline  of  Christian 
life,  it  had  become  impossible  to  regard  the  visible  Church  as 
synonymous  with  the  number  of  the  elect.  We  are  not  now 
concerned  with  the  Augustinian  views  of  predestination  and 
election,  which  at  this  epoch  were  wholly  unknown,  but  are 
merely  indicating  those  elements  in  the  thought  of  Tertullian 
and  Cyprian,  which,  by  their  aptitude  for  the  needs  of  the  age, 
were  destined  to  expand  into  vaster  and  more  widely  dominant 
growths.  We  owe  to  the  masterly  clearness  of  Cyprian's 
style  and  the  intelligible  cast  of  his  thought,  which  never  rises 
beyond  the  reach  of  an  average  reader,  our  ability  to  discern 
with  something  like  confidence  the  difiicult  spiritual  problems 
through  which  the  Church  of  that  age  had  to  be  steered. 

It  will  not  be  out  of  place  to  draw  the  reader's  attention 
to  the  remarkable  despondency  to  which  this  and  other 
writings  of  the  age  bear  witness.  It  is  a  despondency  which 
affects  men's  view  not  only  of  human  nature  and  human 
society  (for  this  we  have  observed  before),  but  of  the  external 
world,  which  is  regarded  as  worn-out  and  ready  to  collapse. 
Neither  in  nature  nor  in  man  did  any  signs  of  recuperation 
appear.  The  one  element  of  hope  that  remained  on  earth 
was  the  Christian's  belief  in  the  advent  of  Christ.  Yet  even 
this  was  no  longer  the  object  of  unalloyed  hopefulness.  The 
corruptions  of  the  Church  had  imported  into  the  Christian 
circle  the  same  gloomy  consciousness  of  guilt  which  oppressed 
the  hcatlien  world,  and  from  which  in  earlier  aj^fes  the  Church 
had  been  wholly  free.  Though  pure  and  lofty  minds  like 
that  of  Cyprian  strove  to  maintain  the  old  ideal  of  the  Church 
as  an  ark  of  eternal  safety,  it  is  clear  that  this  reassuring 
conviction  was  not  universal  among  its  members.     Already 


CYPRIAN.  6ii 

a  heathen  attitude  towards  tlie  Divine  Power  was  mixing 
with  the  filial  consciousness  of  the  first  believers.  Plagues, 
earthquakes,  persecutions,  troubles  of  all  sorts,  began  to  be 
regarded  as  signs  of  the  Divine  wrath,  and  secret  misgivings 
as  to  the  Divine  forgiveness  began  to  agitate  men's  souls. 
It  is  greatly  to  Cyprian's  honour  that,  although  his  intellect 
accepted  the  pessimistic  theories  of  nature  and  man  advanced 
by  his  heathen  contemporaries,  he  was  still  able,  in  spite  of 
the  moral  convulsions  of  the  Church,  to  hold  fast  to  his  faith 
in  the  power  of  Christ  to  save  all  those  who  confessed  Him, 
and  to  preach  to  the  Pagan  world  the  great  truth  that  this 
life  is  a  test  of  character  which  remains  valid  for  ever,  a 
commencement  of  that  eternal  tendency  towards  good  or 
evil  which  is  decided  by  our  attitude  to  Christ  and  His 
Church. 

Indeed,  this  is  the  great  merit  of  all  Cyprian's  writings. 
His  grasp  of  a  subject  and  his  clearness  of  ex|30sition  both 
spring  from  that  practical  aptitude  for  administration  which 
is  the  great  characteristic  of  his  mind.  In  spite  of  his  African 
birth,  his  intellectual  gifts  were  pre-eminently  of  the  Roman 
type.  For  the  deep  mysteries  of  theology  he  had  little  taste, 
and  in  the  history  of  doctrine  he  must  be  ranked  among  the 
ex]30unders,  not  the  discoverers  of  truth. 

His  end  was  worthy  of  his  greatness.  It  is  related  in  the 
biography  by  Pontius,  already  alluded  to,  and  in  the  "  Acts 
of  S.  Cyprian,  Bishop  and  Martyr."  In  the  year  257,  the 
Emperor  Valerian,  who  had  at  first  been  favourable  to  the 
Christians,  was  induced  to  issue  an  edict  forbidding  the 
assembling  of  Christians  in  churches  or  cemeteries,  and  in 
the  autumn  of  this  year  the  edict  reached  Carthage.  The 
proconsul,  Aspasius  ]\aternus,  summoned  Cyprian  before  liis 
tribunal  and  interrogated  him  concerning  his  own  faith  and 
that  of  his  presbyters.  The  bishop  replied  with  dignity, 
refusing  to  compromise  his  fellow-labourers,  and  was  sen- 
tenced to  exile  at  Curubis.  The  consideration  witli  which  he 
was  treated  indicates  the  respect  felt  for  him  by  his  judge, 
the  sentence  being  a  mild  one,  and  carried  out  without  the 
additional  hardships  of  confiscation  or  personal  restraint. 


6i2  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

It  is  recorded  by  Pontius  that  on  the  first  night  of  his 
banishment  at  Curubis  he  saw  a  vision,  which  he  interpreted 
to  mean  that  a  year's  respite  was  granted  him ;  and  the 
event  proved  that  his  interpretation  was  correct. 

Towards  the  close  of  this  period,  Paternns  was  succeeded 
by  Galerius  Maximus,  who  recalled  Cyprian  to  Carthage, 
allowing  him  to  reside  in  his  "gardens,"  probably  the  same 
estate  sold  by  him  years  before,  and  which  had  been  restored 
by  the  kindness  of  his  friends.  Shortly  after  this.  Valerian's 
second  and  much  more  stringent  edict  arrived,  accompanied 
with  letters  to  the  governors  of  provinces,  directing  them  how 
to  deal  with  the  churches  within  their  jurisdiction.  Galerius, 
who  was  at  Utica,  summoned  Cyprian  to  his  presence,  but 
the  bishop  had  determined  if  possible  to  suffer  at  Carthage, 
among  his  own  people.  He  therefore  retired  for  a  time,  but 
as  soon  as  the  proconsul  returned  to  the  vicinity  of  the  city 
he  reappeared  in  his  place.  He  was  again  sent  for,  and 
escorted  to  Sextus,  a  village  not  far  from  Carthage,  where, 
amid  the  breathless  interest  of  his  faithful  flock,  he  was 
publicly  examined,  and  being  found  guilty,  condemned  to  be 
beheaded.  He  met  his  death  with  the  expression  of  thanks 
to  God ;  and  perhaj^s  the  strongest  testimony  to  his  goodness 
is  the  place  his  name  holds  in  the  Eoman  calendar;  for 
though  in  his  lifetime  he  had  inflexibly  withstood  the  aggres- 
sion of  the  Roman  pontiff,  and  had  died,  so  far  as  we  know, 
in  outward  separation  from  the  Roman  communion,  yet  such 
was  the  sanctity  of  his  name,  and  so  unrivalled  were  his 
services  to  the  Catholic  Church,  that  no  prejudice  was  allowed 
to  interfere  with  the  just  appreciation  of  his  career,  and  he 
has  ever  been  honoured  with  a  high  place  in  the  great  roll 
of  saints. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE    ROMAN    CHURCH— MINUCIUS   FELIX— XOVATIAN. 

Of  all  the  writings  included  in  the  period  of  our  survey  there 
are  two,  and  two  only,  which  can  rightly  be  described  as 
charming.  One  is  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  the  other  the 
Odaviiis  of  Minucius.  The  one  tempers  a  profoundly  philo- 
sophic insight  with  a  rich  glow  of  enthusiasm,  kindling  into 
language  of  elaborate  grace  ;  the  other  veils  the  difficulties 
of  a  skilfully  framed  logical  disputation  beneath  a  high-bred 
ease  of  manner  and  light  touches  of  picturesque  descrijotion. 
In  volume  both  these  writings  are  insignificant,  but  in  literary 
I  value  they  are  priceless,  for  they  show  the  manner  in  which 
1  Christianity  was  apprehended  by  intelligent  heathens  of  the 
higher  rank.  Let  the  reader  who  wishes  to  see  the  different 
ways  in  which  Christianity  can  be  presented  peruse  first  the 
ApologeticHS  of  Tertullian,  and  then  the  Odavins.  He  will 
observe  how  fitted  the  Gospel  is  for  taking  hold  of  the  most 
diverse  minds  ;  how  fresh  and  various  are  the  ways  in  which 
its  saving  truths  may  be  presented.  He  will  observe  how 
the  bold  uncompromising  attitude  of  defiance  may  stand 
side  by  side  with  the  gentler  method  of  serious  yet  friendly 
expostulation,  and  how  truly  there  is  room  for  both  in  the 
great  work  of  winning  souls. 

Who  was  Minucius  ?  when  did  he  live  ?  where  did  he 
write  ?  what  were  the  incidents  of  his  life  ?  Unfortunately, 
we  are  not  in  a  position  to  give  a  perfectly  satisfactory 
answer  on  any  one  of  these  points.  The  same  obscurity  that 
shrouds  so  many  of  the  most  interesting  writers  of  the  early 
Church  lies  wrapped  in  a  tantalising  haze  around  the  figure 
of  Minucius.     It  is  true  we  have  a  few  notices  of  him  by 

Lactantius,  Jerome,  and,  later  on,  by  Eucherius,  but  of  such 

6.3 


6i4  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

a  character  as  to  leave  us  in  doubt  whether  these  authors 
know  anything  more  about  liim  than  wliat  they  thought  they 
could  gather  from  his  book. 

His  name  is  given  as  Marcus  Minucius  Felix.  He  be- 
longed, either  by  birth  or  admission,  to  a  gens  that  was 
widely  spread  at  Home,  many  of  whose  members  attained 
at  diiferent  times  to  high  distinction.  We  learn  from  himself 
that  he  practised  at  the  bar  both  before  and  after  his  conver- 
sion, and  from  Lactantius  that  he  gained  a  high  reputation 
as  a  jurist  and  advocate.  The  inference  that  he  occupied  a 
good  position  in  life,  drawn  from  the  setting  of  the  Dialogue, 
is  confirmed  by  a  careful  study  of  its  contents.  The  %irha- 
nitas  that  breathes  through  the  whole  composition  suggests 
t^  type  of  character  which  we  see  nowadays  produced  by 
a  public  school  and  university  training,  followed  by  the 
pleasant  and  healthy  rivaliy  of  professional  life.  The  date 
at  which  he  wrote  is  within  certain  limits  open  to  conjecture. 
The  resemblances  between  his  arguments  and  those  of  Ter- 
tullian  are  far  too  close  to  be  the  result  of  chance.  One  of 
them  must  have  used  the  work  of  the  other.  If  Minucius  was 
the  imitator,  we  have  in  the  date  of  Tertullian's  Ajjologdiciis 
a  terminus  a  quo  for  that  of  the  Octavius.  Opinions  differ, 
however,  on  this  important  point.  Several  high  authorities, 
among  them  Teuffel  in  his  Bonian  Literature,  consider 
Minucius  to  have  been  first  in  the  field,  and  place  him, 
mainly  on  account  of  his  elegant  Latin,  as  far  back  as  the 
time  of  the  Antonines.  To  us,  on  the  contrary,  it  appears 
most  improbable  that  so  original  a  mind  as  Tertullian's 
should  have  borrowed  not  only  arguments  but  phrases  from 
one  so  greatly  his  inferior  in  grasp  of  mind  and  force  of 
expression.^  It  is  mainly,  of  course,  a  question  of  opinion  ; 
but  we  unhesitatingly  pronounce  on  the  side  of  those  who 
consider  Minucius  the  copyist.     Tertullian's  Apology  may  be 

^  The  most  strikin<x  of  all  Tertullian's  arguments,  that  of  the  Tisti- 
vionixim  anivuv  naturalitcr  Christiana',  is  embodied  also  in  the  Octavius, 
but  apparently  without  much  sense  of  its  force.  Whereas  not  only  does 
Tertullian  express  it  with  signal  vividness,  but  he  has  devoted  a  whole 
treatise  to  bringing  out  its  latent  and  unsuspected  capabilities. 


MINUCIUS.  615 

assigned  with  probability  to  198  A.D.  We  therefore  place 
the  Octavius  after  that  date.  On  the  other  hand,  the  treatise 
of  Cyprian,  cle  Idolonom  Vanitate,  shows  an  even  closer  cor- 
respondence with  the  Octavius  ;  and  as  Cyprian's  literary 
talent  was  essentially  of  the  imitative  order,  and  this  work 
is  altogether  sligliter  and  poorer  than  the  Octavius,  we  may 
almost  certainly  regard  it  as  written  after  it.  Cyprian  died 
A.D.  258;  but  the  treatise  in  question  was  probably  one  of 
his  earlier  works.  This  would  bring  the  Octavius  well 
within  the  first  half  of  the  third  century.  But  we  are 
enabled,  from  certain  indications,  to  fix  the  date  more 
exactly.  The  Dialogue  implies  that  the  Christians  were  then 
living  in  a  state  of  comparative  freedom  from  persecution. 
During  the  period  A.D.  200-250  there  were  three  short 
intervals  when  the  Church  enjoyed  rest;  under  Caracalla 
(a.d.  211-217),  under  Alexander  Severus  (a.d.  222-235), 
and  under  Philip  the  Arabian  (a.d.  244-249).  A  tradition  of 
doubtful  authority,  but  probable  in  itself,  speaks  of  Miuucius 
as  a  contemporary  of  Pope  Urban  at  Rome,  which  would 
coincide  with  the  early  part  of  Severus'  reign.  On  the  whole, 
this  seems  the  most  likely  time  for  the  composition  of  the 
work,  which  we  accordingly  fix  at  circ.  A.D.  225-235. 

It  will  be  seen  that  we  regard  the  writer  as  a  Roman. 
This  view,  however,  is  by  no  means  universally  accepted. 
Several  eminent  critics  consider  him  to  have  been  an  African, 
relying  mainly  on  his  rapports  with  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  1 
and  on  an  allusion  to  Cornelius  Pronto  as  Cirtetisis  noster. 
But  this  expression,  be  it  observed,  is  not  used  by  Minucius 
himself,  but  by  Ca3cilius,  the  heathen  interlocutor,  who  may 
have  been  an  African  for  anything  we  know ;  and  besides, 
it  need  not  imply  more  than  that  Pronto  belonged  to  the 
same  party  as  Ca3cilius,  in  other  words,  was  a  heathen. 
Moreover,  the  scene  of  the  dialogue  is  laid  at  Ostia,  whither 
it  is  implied  Minucius  had  invited  his  friends  Ca^cilius  and 
Octavius,  the  latter  of  whom  had  come  to  Home  expressly 
to  visit  him.  We  are  evidently  intended  to  believe  that 
Minucius  lived  at  Rome ;  and  though  this  does  not  prove 
that  he  was  not  of  African   extraction,   yet  the   inference 


6i6  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

from  his  name,  and  still  more  the  peculiarities  of  his  style, 
point  to  one  trained  in  the  school  of  Suetonius  and  Aulus 
Gellius,  rather  than  in  that  of  Fronto  and  Apuleius.  There 
are  many  idioms  of  the  late  silver  age,  many  poetical  and 
unnatural  combinations;  but  there  is  nothing  of  the  stilted 
antifjuarianism  and  forced  Mat  so  characteristic  of  the  Afri- 
can style.  ]\Iinucius  is  an  ardent  admirer  and  constant 
imitator  of  Cicero ;  and  however  deficient  in  the  natural 
strength  and  matchless  lucidity  of  his  master,  he  is  still 
further  removed  from  the  questionable  taste  and  barbarian 
intensity  of  Tertullian. 

The  dialogue,  of  which  we  now  proceed  to  give  some 
account,  opens  after  the  manner  of  Cicero  with  a  short  in- 
troduction, relating  the  circumstances  of  the  discussion  that 
follows.  ]\Iinucius  is  bewailing  the  death  of  his  friend 
Octavius,  and  among  other  reminiscences  dwells  with  special 
delight  on  a  conversation  held  some  years  before,  when 
Octavius  had  been  the  means  of  winning  their  common  friend 
Ca?cilius  from  heathenism  to  Christianity.  The  three  com- 
panions were  strolling  along  the  beach  at  Ostia,  amusing 
themselves  with  the  beauties  of  nature,  and  the  games  of 
the  children,  when  on  passing  a  statue  of  Serapis,  Ca3cilius 
saluted  it,  according  to  custom,  by  kissing  hands.  This  gave 
occasion  for  a  remark  of  Octavius,  which  Ciecilius  rightly 
interjoreted  as  a  reproof  to  himself.  Somewhat  nettled,  he 
challenged  Octavius  to  a  formal  discussion  on  the  relative 
merits  of  the  rival  religions.  Octavius  accepted  the  challenge, 
and  the  two  disputants  appointed  ]\Iinucius  umpire.  The}- 
sat  down  on  some  large  stones  which  had  been  placed  for 
the  protection  of  the  bathing  tents,  and  began  their  argu- 
ment. In  the  end,  Ca)cilius  owned  himself  vanquished,  and 
promised  to  seek  further  instruction  in  the  faith  of  his  two 
friends. 

The  following  analysis  of  the  composition  is  borrowed 
from  Baudouin's  Dissertation,  embodied  in  Holden's  useful 
edition,  from  which  othei*  details  are  taken.  The  reader  will 
obseiTe  how  exactly  the  refutation  answers  each  point  of  the 
attack,  and  how  careful  the  workmanship  of  the  treatise  is  : — 


MINUCIUS.  617 


Summary  of  the  Argument  of  the  Octavius. 

The  argument  of  Ca3cilius  is  arranged  under  four  heads, 
and  stands  thus  : — 

I.  The  Christians   add  notliing  to  human  knowledge  by 
the  doctrines  of   their  religion   (a)  on   God,    {h)   on 
Creation,  and  (c)  on  Providence. 
(a)  For  the  knowledge  of  God  is  conditioned  by  various 
limitations,  such  as — 

1 .  The  inaccessibility  of  truth  in  itself. 

2.  The  inability  of  human  faculties  to  discover  it. 

3.  The  sufficiency  of  a  knowledge  of  self  for  the  pur- 

poses of  practical  life. 

4.  Moreover,  the  environment  of  man  being  terres- 

trial, terrestrial  phenomena  are  his  proper  study.^ 
(h)  The  idea  of  Creation  is  a  fallacy,  for  science  can 
explain  the  existing  state  of  things  by  the  theory 
of  chance  combinations, 
(c)  The  Providential  theory   of  final   causes  is  utterly 
unphilosophical :     mechanical     causation    accounts 
for   everything;  it  is  uniform  and  unceasing,  and 
admits  of  no  exceptions. 
II.  It  is  therefore  right  to  hold  fast  to  the  religion  handed 
down  to  us,  on  the  ground  (a)  of  its  certainty  and  (b) 
utility. 
(a)  It  is  certain  (i.e.,  relatively,  not  absolutely) — 

1.  Because  it  is  in   possession  of  the  field;  in  other 

words,  where  nothing  truly  certain  can  be  had, 
prescription  is  the  best  title. 

2.  Because  it  is  ancient ;  and  antiquity  is  worthy  of 

veneration. 

3.  Because  it  is  accredited  by  those  who  were  wiser 

than  we,  living  as  they  did  nearer  to  the  time  of 
the  gods. 

1  This  is  from  the  old  maxim  durjTbv  6vTa  dvr)Ta  (fypovelv,  wliich  Aristotle 
repudiates,  saying  that  the  truly  virtuous  and  wise  man  will  strive  6<tov 
ivdtx^rat,  ddavarl^eiv. 


6i8  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

(b)  It  is  useful — 

Because  Rome  owes  to  it  (i)  her  piety,  which  gives 
her  the  capacity  for  greatness ;  (2)  her  empire, 
wliich  is  the  Divine  reward  for  her  piety. 

This  is  proved  by  a  consideration  of  Roman 
religion :  its  native  deities,  its  imported  deities,  the 
purity  of  its  Vestals,  the  complex  arrangements 
for  showing  gratitude  for  Divine  benefits,  or  de- 
precating Divine  wrath  ;  the  power  of  auguries  to 
reward  obedience,  and  the  penalties  of  disobedi- 
ence ;  the  fulfilment  of  oracles  and  prophecies. 
III.  The  Christian  religion,  on  the  other  hand,  is  not  useful 
but  injurious.     This  is  shown   {a)  by  its  failure  to 
improve  the  people,  (b)  by  its  degradation  of  religious 
rites,  and  (c)  by  its  monstrous  beliefs. 
(a)  Its  failure  to  improve  the  people  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  Christians — 

1.  Are  taken  from  the  lowest  dregs  of  the  people, 

chiefly  women  and  children. 

2.  Are  full  of  factions  and  disputes. 

3.  Cannot  defend  their  cause  by  public  argument. 

4.  Increase   no   one    knows  how,    not   by   reputable 

methods. 

5.  Have  a  system  of  secret  signs  for  recognition. 
(h)  Its  degradation  of  religion  is  shown  by — 

1.  Its  erecting  an  ass's  head  into  an  object  of  worship.^ 

2.  Its  worshipping  obscene  symbols. 

3.  Its  adoring  a  crucified  malefactor. 

4.  Its  nefarious  ceremony  of  initiation  by  means  of 

an  infant's  blood. 

5.  Its  promiscuous  feasts,  with  their  incestuous  accom- 

paniments. 

6.  Its  secrecy  of  worship. 

^  This  stranpe  misconcc])tion  is  illustrated  by  the  caricature  discovered 
under  the  ruins  of  the  Palatine  palace,  "a  rough  sketch,  traced,  in  all 
probability,  by  the  hand  of  some  Pagan  slave  in  one  of  the  earlier  years 
of  the  third  century  of  our  era." — Liddon,  "  Bampton  Lectures,"  eleventh 
edition,  p.  404. 


MINUCIUS.  619 

(c)  Its  monstrous  beliefs,  viz. — 

1.  Its    single,  solitary    God  ;    who   is   too    weak    to 

protect  His  people,  yet  is  called  Almighty, 
All-knowing,  Omnipresent  yet  Invisible. 

2.  The  future  destruction  of  the  universe,  which  reason 

necessarily  conceives  as  eternal. 

3.  Above  all,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  absurdity 

of  which  is  shown  by  numerous  considerations; 
for  instance,  the  necessity  of  giving  up  cremation 
for  fear  the  bodies  should  be  lost,  the  folly  of 
deferring   rewards    and    punishments   till   after 
death,   the  injustice  of  punishing  men  for  the 
accident  of  ignorance  of  Christ,  the  impossibility 
of  conceiving  of  the  process,  the  disastrous  effects 
of  the  belief  on  those  who  hold  it,  since  it  exposes 
them   to   hatred,   isolation,   tortures  and  death, 
deprives  them  of  the  use  of  lawful  enjoyments, 
and  mocks  them  with  illusory  future  delights  in 
exchange  for  real  present  miseries. 
IV.  It  follows  therefore  that  we  should  abstain  from  in- 
quiring after  the  Deity,  whose  Nature  is  unknowable 
to  us,  and  whom  the  wisest  and  best  men  have  advised 
us  not  to  attempt  to  search  out. 

Each  one  of  these  objections  is  answered  in  turn  by 
Octavius,  who  also  strengthens  his  argument  by  five  pole- 
mical digressions.  The  reader  will  be  interested  to  see  his 
counter-statement,  which  follows  the  plan  of  the  attack : — 

I.  Christianity  can  and  does  introduce  a  new  certainty  into 
the  field  of  human  research,  by  its  doctrines  of  God, 
Creation,  and  Providential  Government. 
(a)  The  knowledge  of  God  is  possible  ;  for — 

1 .  Divine  truth  is  ^;c?'  sc  knowable :  the  defect  is  in 

tlie  subject,  not  the  object. 

2.  Divine  truth  is  apprehended  by  immediate  intui- 

tion ;  to  which  the  pride  of  learning  and  the 
intoxication  of  prosperity  are  highly  disadvan- 
tajreous. 


620  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

3.  Self-knowledge  is  sufficient  for  salvation ;   but  it 

cannot   be   attained  witliout  the  knowledge  of 
God. 

4.  The  true  nature   of  man   looks  upward,  and  can 

nev^er  be  satisfied   with    a   mere   knowledge   of 
phenomena.^ 

(b)  The  idea  of  Creation  is  necessarily  reached  by  the 

mind  as  soon  as  it  has  clearly  realised  that  chance 
combinations  are  unable  to  account  for  the  existing 
order  of  things. 

(c)  The  Providential  government  of  the  world  is  shown 

by  the  perfection  of  nature,  as  a  whole,  and  in  all 

its  parts  ;  and  specially  by  the  evidences  of  design, 

which  point  unmistakably  to  a  Designer. 

II.  It  is  not  right  to  accept  what  is  handed  down  to  us, 

if  it  is  evidently  false.     It   can  be  shown  that  the 

heathen  religion  is  neither  (a)  certain,  nor  [h)  useful. 

(a)  It  is  not  certain  ;  for — 

1.  Its  certainty  is  admitted  to  be  only  relative;  a 

mere  makeshift ;  whereas  that  of  Christianity  is 
absolute. 

2.  Antiquity  is  venerable,  but  not  infallible. 

3.  The  ancients  were  in  no  better  position  than  we 

for  knowing  the  truth.- 

(b)  It  is  not  useful ;  for  neither  the  supposed  piety  of 

the  Roman  people  nor  their  actual  dominion  can  be 

traced  to  their  religious  belief. 
I.  The  piety  of  Rome  is  very  dubious.  Her  indi- 
genous deities  were  of  the  most  unspiritual  type  ; 
her  imported  ones  sanctioned  all  kinds  of  im- 
morality. As  to  the  Vestals,  whatever  they  may 
once  have  been,  chastity  can  no  longer  be  affirmed 
of  them. 

^  This  argument  is  beautifully  embodied  in  the  golden  saying  of  Augus- 
tine, "  Fecisti  nos,  Domine,  ad  Te  :  et  irrequietum  est  cor  nostrum  donee 
requiescat  in  Te." 

-  This  is  Bacon's  favourite  argument,  that  '*  Antiquity  was  tlie  childhood 
of  the  race,  and  we  are  the  true  Ancients." 


MINUCIUS.  621 

2.  The  dominion  of  Home  is  not  traceable  to  her 
religion,   for  other  nations   have   won   empires. 
Auguries  and  oracles  may  have   coincided  with 
Roman  victories;  but  it  has  yet  to  be  proved 
that  they  cmtsed  them. 
III.  The   Christian   religion  is  useful  and  not  injurious. 
This  is  shown  (a)  by  its  unparalleled  success  in  im- 
proving men's  moral  character ;  {h)  by  its  purification 
of  worship ;  (c)  by  its  beliefs,  which,  so  far  from  being 
monstrous,  are  in  the  highest  degree  elevating. 
(a)  The  opinion  that  Christians  are  a  depraved  race  is  a 
pure  fallacy,  instigated  by  demons.     At  the  same 
time — 

1.  They  do  come  chiefly  from  the  lower  classes,  and 

contain  a  large  proportion  of  women  and  chil- 
dren. But  these  form  the  largest  part  of  the 
human  race ;  and  there  are  many  Christians  of 
good  position,  men  and  women. 

2.  They  are  not  factious,  but  closely  united. 

3.  They  do  not  speak  in  public,  but  that  is  because 

they  are  refused  a  hearing. 

4.  They  do  increase  rapidly,  but  their  increase  has 

all  the  evidences  of  healthy,  not  of  noxious 
growth. 

5.  Their  secret  signs  are  innocent  precautions  against 

betrayal,  not  tokens  of  guilt. 
(h)  The  opinion  that  Christians  degrade  religion  is  also 
a  falsehood.     Every  one  of  the  e\ddences  alleged 
by  Cgecilius  can  not  only  be  disproved  but  retorted 
upon  the  Pagans.     The  wonder  is  that  they  have 
ever  been  believed, 
(c)  The  so-called  monstrous  beliefs  of  Christians  are  in 
reality  most  rational,  c.fj. — 
I.  The  Unity  of  God.    His  omnipotence,  omniscience, 
omnipresence.     His  allowing  the  Jews  to  perish 
is  in  strict  conformity  witli  His  message  to  them, 
if  they  forsook  Him.     It  in  no  way  proves  His 
weakness. 


622  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

2.  The  destruction  of  the  universe  is  neither  repug- 

nant to  reason  nor  to  the  views  of  philosophers. 
Many  sects  actually  teach  it. 

3.  The  resurrection  of  the  dead  is  a  thing  quite  apart 

from  the  superstitious  adjuncts  confused  with  it. 
As    to   the    miseries   it    causes   the    Christians, 
opinions  differ  as  to  what  is  good  or  evil.     Chris- 
tians willingly  suffer  in  the  body,  knowing  that 
they  will  gain  an  eternity  of  spiritual  bliss.    They 
willingly  give  up  loose  and  guilty  pleasures,  and 
in  doing  so  are  conscious  of  no  unhappiness,  but 
the  reverse. 
IV.   We   ought   not  to   shrink  from    contemplation  and 
investigation  of  the  Divine  Nature,  because  Truth  is 
within  our  grasp.     If  it  has  not  always  been,  it  is 
now ;  and  it  forms  the  best  food  for  the  soul  of  man. 
The    scepticism   even  of   great  philosophers  has  no 
weight  with   Christians,   for  they  learn   from  quite 
other  teachers. 

Besides  this  scheme  of  direct  refutation,  there  are  certain 
episodical  proofs  inserted  where  needed,  and  calculated  to 
strengthen  the  argument.  They  are  five  in  number:  (i) 
On  the  Unity  of  God,  proved  from  reason  and  testimony. 
(2)  On  the  origin  of  the  false  gods,  who  are  shown  by  many 
evidences  to  have  been  merely  deified  men,  a  process  which, 
in  the  time  of  Minucius,  was  still  going  on.i  (3)  On  the 
vanity  of  idols.  (4)  On  the  existence  of  demons,  and  their 
intimate  association  with  the  doctrines  and  ceremonies  of 
heathenism.  (5)  On  the  injustice  of  persecuting  Christianity, 
and  especially  of  calling  it  a  crime,  and  yet  applying  torments 
to  extort  a  denial  of  it,-  a  topic  also  treated  with  the  greatest 
fulness  by  Tertullian. 

These  digressions  are  closely  interwoven  with  the  thread  of 

^  Wlien  Vespasian  was  attacked  by  his  last  illness,  he  remarked,  "  Ut 
puto,  deus  fio."     To  call  an  emperor  Divus  before  his  death  was  a  crime. 

-  Ch.  xxviii.  It  is  this  jiastjage  more  than  any  that  seems  as  if  it  must 
be  an  imitation  of  Tertullian. 


MINUCIUS.  623 

the  argument,  and  the  attentive  reader  will  easily  discern  to 
which  point  each  belongs.  The  remark  he  will  at  once  make 
on  the  whole  is  that,  as  a  statement  of  the  Christian  case,  it  is 
extremely  incomplete.  The  personality  of  Christ  is  dwelt  on 
but  slightly,  His  divinity  only  hinted  at.  His  pre-existence 
as  the  Eternal  Logos  never  mentioned ;  the  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  conspicuous  by  its  absence.  If  none  of  the 
Apologies  is  so  elegantly  written,  none  is  so  barren  of  dis- 
tinctive teaching.  Possibly  ^linucius  thought  the  method 
he  pursued  the  best  for  attracting  the  intelligent  heathen, 
who  might  be  repelled  by  a  more  esoteric  treatment ;  pos- 
sibly the  work  is  a  genuine  piece  of  history,  and  reproduces 
what  Octavius  really  said.  From  the  epilogue  we  infer  that 
Caecilius  desired  initiation  into  the  inner  mysteries  of  the 
faith,  and  that  Minucius  intended  to  reserve  this  process 
for  a  future  dialogue.  If  so,  we  have  no  means  of  knowing 
whether  he  fulfilled  his  intention. 

Some  recent  evidence  has  come  to  light  which  seems  to 
confirm  the  idea  that  the  Caecilius  of  the  Dialogue  is  identical 
with  Ciecilius  Natalis,  who  was  chief  magistrate  of  Cirta  in 
Numidia  from  210  to  215  A.D.,  in  which  latter  year  he  erected 
a  triumphal  arch  in  honour  of  Caracalla.  His  conversion 
therefore  must,  on  this  hypothesis,  be  posterior  to  the  above 
date,  so  that,  if  Minucius  wrote  about  twenty  years  later, 
the  date  suggested  for  the  composition  (a.d.  235)  seems  on 
every  ground  the  most  probable. 

The  literary  history  of  the  work  is  curious.  For  centuries 
it  appeared  among  the  writings  of  Arnobius  as  the  eighth 
book  of  his  treatise  adversiis  Gcntcs,  the  similarity  of  its 
title  to  the  number  odaims,  and  the  general  resemblance  of 
its  contents,  being  no  doubt  the  cause  of  the  confusion.  The 
difference  of  style,  however,  is  so  great  that  we  cannot  com- 
pliment the  early  critics  on  tlunr  sagacity.  It  was  Francis 
Baudouin  (Bauduinus),  a.d.  1560,  who  first  restored  it  to  its 
true  author,  and  wrote  an  excellent  dissertation  on  its  con- 
tents. Jerome  states  that  a  work  was  current  in  his  time 
on  Fate  (de  Fato),  which  was  attributed  to  Minucius,  but 
that  the  difference  of  style  proved  it  not  to  be  his. 


624  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY 


Novatian, 


The  work  of  Mimicius,  supposing  it  to  have  been  written 
at  Home,  supplies  no  information  about  the  Roman  Church. 
It  lies  absolutely  outside  the  ecclesiastical  sphere.  It  is  a 
melancholy  fact  that  the  only  three  writers  whom  we  can 
I  refer  with  certainty  to  this  Church,  one  and  all  express  the 
keenest  dissatisfaction  with  it.  Of  Hermas  and  Hippolytus 
we  have  already  treated.  It  remains  to  speak  shortly  of 
Novatian,  who  is  a  prominent  figure  in  the  Church  history 
of  the  time,  and  a  writer  and  theologian  of  no  ordinary 
merit.  Of  his  sincere  but  stern  and  harsh  character,  of 
the  stormy  events  of  his  schismatic  episcopate,  of  his  final 
suppression  and  the  decadence  of  his  sect,  we  need  say  little 
here.  They  may  be  gathered  from  any  work  on  Church 
history,  or  may  be  learned  from  the  excellent  and  appre- 
ciative essay  in  Evans'  Theological  Biography.  Our  attention 
will  be  confined  to  two  features  in  his  career — his  Puritanism, 
and  his  position  as  a  writer. 

Novatian  was,  if  not  a  Roman,  at  any  rate  an  Italian  by 
birth.  When  we  first  meet  with  him  he  is  a  presbyter  in  the 
Roman  Church,  taking  a  leading  part  during  the  interregnum 
which  followed  the  martyrdom  of  Fabian.  The  Emperor 
Decius,  in  his  furious  hostility  to  the  Gospel,  had  given  the 
Christians  of  the  capital  to  understand  that  if  they  elected  a 
bishop  he  would  unquestionably  be  one  of  the  first  victims  of 
the  Imperial  vengeance.  The  Church,  with  wise  prudence, 
determined  to  wait  its  opportunity.  Meanwhile  Novatian, 
by  his  moral  strictness  and  commanding  talents,  had  so  gained 
the  confidence  of  all  parties  as  to  be  commissioned  to  write 
in  the  Church's  name  two  important  hitters  to  Cyprian  on 
the  question  of  the  readmission  of  the  lapsed  to  communion. 
These  letters  are  extant,  and  form  the  thirtieth  and  thirty- 
first  of  the  Cyprianic  collection.  We  are  somewhat  sur- 
prised to  find  that  he  expresses  himself  as  completely  at  one 
with  the  decision  of  his  brethren,  which  agreed  with  that  of 
Cyprian  himself,  viz.,  to  treat  the  question  in  a  liberal  and 
indulgent  spirit. 


NOVATIAN.  6: 


A  man  so  trusted  might  well  aspire  to  the  bishopric.  Nova- 
tian,  however,  solemnly  declared  that  he  had  no  such  intention. 
Nevertheless,  when  after  an  interval  of  a  year  and  a  quarter 
(a.D.  251)  the  choice  of  the  Church  fell  with  almost  complete 
unanimity  upon  Cornelius,  Novatian  felt  himself  aggrieved. 
The  new  bishop  was  an  untried  man,  and  of  comparatively 
mean  intellect,  though  his  moral  firmness,  displayed  on  more 
than  one  trying  occasion,  abundantly  justified  his  election. 
It  may  seem  strange  that  the  Roman  community  should  pass 
over  their  ablest  man,  but  several  circumstances  combined 
to  make  Novatian  unsuitable  for  the  Episcopal  throne.  He 
had  been  converted  late  in  life,  and  had  only  received  the 
imperfect  form  of  baptism  known  as  clinical,  which  was  a 
canonical  bar  to  orders.^ 

Notwithstanding  this,  and  strongly  against  the  wishes  of 
his  clergy,  Fabian  had  ordained  him  priest,  without  requiring 
him  to  pass  through  the  inferior  grades  of  the  ministiy. 
These  irregularities,  to  a  church  so  tenacious  of  formality  as 
the  Roman,  formed  a  serious  obstacle  to  his  consecration. 
But  a  still  more  important  objection  lay  behind.  The  temper 
of  Novatian  was  thoroughly  uncongenial  to  the  ruling  spirit 
of  the  Church.  Stern  in  his  own  self-discipline,  he  expected 
equal  austerity  in  others.  Holding  a  lofty  conception  of  the 
Church  as  the  company  of  elect  and  holy  souls,  he  was  dis- 
inclined for  that  temporising  laxity  which  is  so  necessary  an 
element  in  the  policy  of  ruling  societies,  whether  ecclesiastical 
or  civil.  Moreover,  his  convictions,  though  orthodox,  were 
formed  by  the  rigid  logic  of  systematic  thought,  and  might 
prove  lacking  in  that  pliancy  and  adaptability  to  practical 
exigencies  which  the  dangers  of  the  age  demanded.  In 
spite  of  his  formal  recommendation  of  a  lenient  treatment  of 
the  lapsed,  a  suspicion  was  felt  that,  once  in  power,  a  severer 

^  Novatian  had  been  subject  to  periods  of  terrible  depression,  during 
one  of  which  he  had  employed  the  aid  of  Christian  exorcists,  who  suc- 
ceeded in  relieving  him  for  a  time.  On  a  subsequent  seizure,  being,  as 
was  supposed,  at  the  point  of  death,  he  received  baptism  by  sprinkling. 
In  his  previous  life  as  a  heathen,  he  had  been  known  as  an  adherent  of 
the  Stoic  philosophy. 

2  R 


626  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

temper  would  be  disclosed.  And  the  instinct  of  Rome,  as 
usual,  was  ri^^lit.  Novatian  was  at  heart  a  Puritan.  Having 
subdued  his  own  natural  inq^ulses,  he  had  no  toleration 
for  such  as  failed  to  conquer  theirs.  To  this  stern  precisian 
grades  of  guilt  seemed  unmeaning.  The  Church's  scale  of 
penance,  graduated  to  suit  the  delicate  shades  of  abjuration, 
based  as  it  was  not  only  on  common  sense,  but  on  the  prin- 
ciples of  equity,  appeared  to  him  profane  trifling.  Ambition 
lurked  under  his  fair  disclaimer,  and  spiritual  pride  made 
submission  to  an  inferior  man  intolerable.  He  allowed 
himself  to  be  consecrated  Anti-pope  under  circumstances 
little  creditable  to  his  reputation.  His  adherents  were  few, 
but  devoted.  Like  him,  they  were  distinguished  by  ortho- 
doxy as  well  as  by  rigid  purity  of  life.  They  gave  themselves 
the  name  of  the  Clean  {Kadapoi). 

Novatian  has  suffered  from  being  painted  by  his  enemies. 
Though  induced  by  unscrupulous  partisans,  such  as  Novatus, 
to  lend  himself  to  proceedings  that  were  unquestionably 
culpable,  and  involved  him  in  the  condemnation  of  a  schis- 
matic, we  must  distinguish  between  his  position  and  theirs. 
His  ruling  idea  was  a  strictly  religious  one,  the  identity 
between  the  visible  and  invisible  churches.  Possessed  with 
this,  he  could  not  endure  the  laxity  of  discipline  which  he 
saw  around  him.  He  doubtless  persuaded  himself  that  in 
the  sight  of  God  he  was  the  true  bishop  and  Cornelius  the 
interloper.  His  attitude  to  Cornelius  resembles  that  of 
Hippolytus  to  Callistus,  but  with  this  essential  difference, 
that  Cornelius  was  a  godly  and  orthodox  prelate,  whereas 
Callistus  had  obtained  his  position  by  the  basest  intrigue. 
The  fact  that  the  influ(>ntial  body  of  Confessors  at  first  gave 
him  their  support  is  sufficient  testimony  to  his  genuine  piety  : 
but  the  dignified  reproof  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,^  the 
stern  sarcasms  of  Cyprian,  and  the  subsequent  submission  of 

1  This  ^^cntle  prelate  could  write  severely  when  occ-usion  demanded. 
He  says,  *•  It  is  with  reason  tliat  we  detest  Novatian  for  rending  asunder 
the  Church,  drawing  some  of  the  bretliren  into  impieties  and  blasphemies, 
introducing  a  novel  and  impious  doctrine  respecting  God  {i.e.,  limiting 
His  mercy),  traducing  our  most  kind  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  devoid  of  pity, 


NOVATIAN.  627 

the  Confessors  to  Cornelius,  taught  him  the  important  lesson 
that  resistance  to  authority  is  not  to  be  justified  by  mere 
purity  of  moral  conviction. 


His  Writing's. 

The  writings  ascribed  to  Novatian  that  have  come  down 
to  us  are  few,  but  not  unimportant.  They  are  distinguished 
for  their  calm  cultivated  tone,  their  clearness  of  thought, 
and  their  admirable  style.  The  two  letters  to  Cy]irian  are 
perhaps  the  best  composed  documents  of  the  kind  that 
we  possess.  The  treatise  On  the  Trinity,  which  used  to  be 
included  among  Tertullian's  works,  is  very  different  from 
the  writings  of  that  Father,  though  it  shows  abundant  traces 
of  a  careful  study  of  them.  In  fact,  Tertullian  is  treated 
by  subsequent  Latin  theologians  as  a  mine  from  which  they 
dig  without  scruple,  only  subjecting  the  rough  ore  to  a 
process  of  refinement.  This  treatise  opens  with  a  declaration 
of  belief  in  One  God,  who  is  described  in  philosophical  lan- 
guage, the  Deity  of  Theism  as  well  as  of  Christianity.  The 
writer's  pen  lingers  with  a  tenderness  rare  in  the  theologic 
sphere  over  pictures  of  nature  which  by  their  grandeur, 
sweetness,  or  beauty  testify  the  goodness  of  God.  They 
recall  well-known  ^^assages  from  the  De  Natura  Dcoritm  of 
Cicero,  and  the  moral  letters  of  Seneca,  whom  he  justly 
designates  as  scepe  noster. 

The  greater  part  of  the  work  is  an  exposition  of  the 
Person  of  Christ,  the  double  nature  of  which  he  defends 
both  from  the  necessities  of  reasoning,  and  from  the  authority 
of  Scripture.  He  falls  into  a  few  unguarded  expressions 
which  appear  to  derogate  from  the  majesty  of  God,  but  do 
not  substantially  affect  the  value  of  liis  argument  as  a 
contribution  to  the  Church's  Christology.      His  ((untations 

and,  in  addition,  setting  at  nought  the  holy  lavcr,  subverting  the  faitli 
and  confession  which  precedes  it,  and  utterly  j)utting  to  llight  from 
among  them  (his  adherents)  the  Holy  Spirit." — Eus.  H.  E.  vii.  8,  I  am 
glad  to  borrow  the  translation  from  Evans'  article,  as  an  acknowledgment 
of  its  value. 


628  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

from  the  New  Testament  are  numerous,  and  of  special 
interest  from  the  various  readings  they  embody,  as  well  as 
from  their  peculiar  Latinity.  It  seems  probable  that  the 
earliest  Latin  version  was  made  in  Africa,  and  was  in  circula- 
tion at  Rome  ;  at  any  rate,  the  Latin  of  Novatian's  quotations 
shows  an  African  element. 

The  subject  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  dismissed  in  one  short 
chapter.  The  great  controversies  as  to  His  Personality, 
eternity,  and  Godhead  had  not  yet  come  to  the  front.  From 
one  expression,  where  he  says  that  the  Fount  of  the  whole 
Spirit  remained  in  Christ,^  we  perceive  that  the  Western 
Church  already  displayed  that  bias  towards  the  Double 
Procession  which  afterwards  caused  its  separation  from  the 
Eastern  Church.  The  style  of  this  treatise  is  comparatively 
simple,  flowing  and  unimpassioned. 

The  little  pamphlet  On  Jewish  Meats,^  usually  printed 
with  Cyprian's  works,  is  also  ascribed  to  him.  It  has  the 
character  of  an  episcopal  charge,  and  the  tone  of  schismatic 
exclusiveness  is  seen  in  his  addressing  his  flock  as  "  the  people 
that  stand  steadfast  in  the  Gospel,  who  maintain  and  teach 
the  Gospel  in  sincerity,  and  undefiled  with  any  spot  of  per- 
verse doctrine."  Not  content  with  addressing  his  readers  in 
the  usual  manner  as  "  Beloved,"  he  salutes  them  as  ''  Most 
holy."  3 

Novatiau  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  his  associate 
and  evil  counsellor  Novatus.  The  latter  seems  to  have  been 
a  really  worthless  man,  of  doubtful  morals,  and  an  inveterate 
organiser  of  vexatious  factions.  Novatian  was  a  far  nobler 
nature,  carried  partly  by  perverse  spiritual  pride,  partly  by 
the  inducements  of  others,  into  a  position  with  which  he 
was  unfitted  to  cope,  and  in  which  his  worst  qualities  were 
unfortunately  brought  into  prominence.  Had  he  resigned 
all  pretensions  to  episcopal  authority,  and  contented  himself 
with  the  unoflicial  dissciuination  of  his  views,  he  might  have 
Iw.-n  ])lanied  as  a  schismatic,  but  he  would  not  have  forfeited 

'  "Totius  spiritu.s  in  C'lni.sto  foiite  mnancntc." 

'■'  De  Cibis  Jiuhtorum, 

'  For  this  criticism  I  am  indebted  to  Professor  Evans. 


NOVATIAN.  629 

the  respect  of  the  impartial  historian.  As  it  is,  however, 
it  is  difficult  to  praise  him.  In  bigotry  of  Puritan  exclusive- 
ness  he  may  be  compared  with  Tertullian,  and  in  this  and 
other  respects  with  Marcion.  But  he  lacks  the  element  of 
nobility  which  redeems  TertuUian's  lack  of  charity,  and  he 
falls  far  below  Marcion  in  theological  genius,  and  in  what 
we  may  call  the  romance  of  misfortune. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

ARNOBIUS  (flor.  a.d.  2go?)— L  ACT  AN  TI  US  (a.d.  240-325?)— 
COMMODIAN  (A.D.  260?)— VICTORINUS  PETAVIENSIS. 

"VVilAT  may  be  called  the  liberal  or  iindogmatic  method  of 
stating  the  Christian  faith  was  approached  by  leading  minds 
both  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  but  with  only  limited 
success.  In  the  East  the  great  Alexandrian  Fathers,  by 
their  profound  speculations,  their  vast  learning,  and  their 
literary  ability,  compelled  universal  respect,  yet  within  a 
century  and  a  half  after  the  death  of  Origen  his  influence 
had  already  begun  to  wane  and  his  reputation  to  enter  upon 
its  long  eclipse.  In  the  Western  Church  the  attempt  was 
made  under  less  favourable  conditions  and  by  men  of  inferior 
power.  The  West  was  always  less  tolerant  of  diversity  of 
opinion,  and  this  in  itself  was  hostile  to  independence  of 
thought.  ^loreover,  the  writers  who  represent  the  liberal 
tendency  cannot  be  said  to  aim  at  transcending  the  limits  of 
dogma,  but  rather  to  show  an  inclination  to  ignore  them. 
Minucius,  Arnobius,  Lactantius,  are  the  three  chief  names. 
They  are  directly  connected  by  a  spiritual  succession,  and 
have  many  common  features.  It  must  be  confessed  that 
theology  is  but  little  indebted  to  any  of  them.  Far  from 
comparing  with  the  great  thinkers  with  whom  we  have  for  a 
moment  coupled  them,  they  must  be  pronounced  to  be  men 
of  only  moderate  talent,  deficient  in  depth,  rhetorical  and 
argumentative  rather  than  speculative,  and  above  all,  essen- 
tially stylists. 

In  the  domain  of  style  they  stand  high.  Of  ^linucius 
we  have  already  spoken  ;  of  Lactantius  it  is  enough  to  state 
that  he  fully  vindicates  his  claim  to  be  considered  the  Chris- 
tian Cicero.     Arnobius,  tlie  least  distinguished  of  the  three, 

6;.. 


ARXOBIUS.  631 

nevertheless  ranks  as  a  considerable  man  of  letters.  His 
name  is  of  Greek  origin.  He  is  generally  associated  with 
the  town  of  Sicca  in  Numidia,  where  he  exercised  with  con- 
spicuous success  the  profession  of  a  rhetorician  during  the 
latter  part  of  the  third  century.^ 

His  labours  were  not  confined  to  the  lecture-hall.  He 
used  his  pen  in  the  great  duel  of  religions  on  the  side  of 
Paganism,  and  made  some  name  as  a  controversialist.  But 
a  change  came  over  him,  which  resulted  in  his  deciding  to 
profess  the  Christian  faith.  He  himself  tells  us  nothing  of 
the  process.  If  we  are  to  believe  S.  Jerome,  it  was  by 
dreams  that  he  was  led  from  error  to  truth.  The  view  of 
Neander  is,  however,  more  probable,  namely,  that  Arnobius 
had  long  been  dissatisfied  with  the  Pagan  creed,  and  that 
convictions  which  culminated  (possibly  not  without  the  aid 
of  dreams)  in  the  Christian  belief  had  been  slowly  ripening 
in  his  mind.  He  determined  to  present  himself  as  a  candidate 
for  baptism,  and  applied  to  the  bishop  with  that  intent. 
The  bishop  not  unnaturally  hesitated  to  accept  without 
further  evidence  an  application  so  unexpected ;  he  probably 
feared  that  under  the  guise  of  a  catechumen  the  convert 
sought  an  opportunity  of  acquiring  information  for  polemical 
purposes ;  at  any  rate  he  refused  to  administer  the  sacra- 
ment. To  dispel  his  doubts,  Arnobius  wrote  the  Seven  Books 
of  Disputations  against  the  Heathen,  which  we  still  possess, 
and  their  manifest  sincerity  removed  all  obstacles  to  his 
admission  within  the  Church.  Such  at  least  is  Jerome's 
account,  and  it  may  be  accepted  as  true,  though  it  does  not 
quite  account  for  all  the  features  of  the  work. 

Of  his  subsequent  life  and  spiritual  history  nothing  further 
is  known.     It  is  likely  that  he  continued  as  a  Christian  to 

^  In  II.  71,  he  speaks  of  the  time  since  the  building  of  Rome  as  10^0 
years,  more  or  hss,  probably,  in  his  inexactness,  echoing  the  words  of  an 
ancient  chronicler  : — 

"  Sunt  septingcnti  paulo  plus  aut  minus  anni 
Augusto  augurio  postquam  incluta  condita  Koma  est." 

Strictly  speaking,  his  date  a.d.  297  will  not  stand,  as  there  are  evident 
allusions  in  his  book  to  tlie  Diocletian  persecution,  which  began  a.d.  30 


632  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

give  instruction  in  rhetoric,  for,  in  spite  of  his  frequent 
encomiums  on  tlie  unadorned  simplicity  of  the  Scriptures,  it 
is  clear  that  he,  in  common  with  most  ecclesiastical  writers, 
fully  appreciated  the  advantages  arising  from  technical 
knowledge  and  trained  controversial  skill.  An  impres- 
sion prevailed  among  early  critics,  doubtless  derived  from 
Jerome's  story,  that  Arnobius  wrote  his  work  in  haste.  This 
is  rendered  probable  also  by  internal  evidence.  Though 
obviously  penned  with  facility,  and  drawn  from  the  resources 
of  a  well-stored  mind,  the  arrangement  is  unequal,  the  treat- 
ment prolix  and  full  of  repetitions,  especially  in  the  last  two 
books,  and  the  conclusion  abrupt  and  inadequate. 

Under  such  circumstances  of  composition,  it  would  be 
out  of  place  to  expect  any  very  profound  treatment  of  his 
subject.  A  novice  could  hardly  penetrate  to  the  inner 
mysteries  of  the  faith.  Yet  it  is  instructive  to  contrast 
Arnobius'  performance  with  the  two  productions  of  another 
African  novitiate,  not  far  removed  in  time  from  his  own, 
viz.,  the  Vanity  of  Idols  and  the  Testimonies  against  the  Jews, 
written  by  Cyprian  in  the  twelve  months  following  his  con- 
version. We  observe  in  Cyprian's  case  two  strong  influences 
at  work,  the  oratorical  impulse  to  confute  the  errors  which 
once  held  him  captive,  and  the  learner's  desire  to  gain  from 
a  study  of  the  sacred  books  the  true  key  to  the  Church's 
position.  Though  Cyprian  did  not  owe  his  conversion  to  the 
Bible,  he  devoted  himself  with  enthusiasm  to  the  study  of  it, 
and  in  a  remarkably  short  time  obtained  a  thorough  con- 
troversial mastery  of  its  contents.  Arnobius,  on  the  contrary, 
betrays  no  knowledge  of  either  the  Old  or  New  Testaments. 
One  would  almost  think  he  had  never  read  them.  He  does 
not  even  interest  himself  at  second-hand  in  their  doctrinal 
teaching,  except  so  far  as  it  concerns  the  Deity  and  Messiah- 
ship  of  Christ,  His  single  quotation  from  Scripture  is 
prefaced  by  the  formula,  ''illiid  xmlgatum"  as  if  it  was  a 
trite  saying  picked  up  he  knew  not  where.^ 

^  This  indifTorencc  to  Ihc  fountain-source  of  doctrine  may  be  paralleled 
in  the  present  day  among  the  adiiercnts  of  the  Latin  Church.  It  is, 
however,  right  to  state  that  Neander,  who  is  a  higlily  apjirociative  critic 


ARNOBIUS.  633 

On  the  central  question  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  his 
language  is  generally  orthodox,  and  much  fuller  and  more 
explicit  than  that  of  Minucius.  At  the  same  time,  it  is 
liable  to  criticism  on  account  of  its  deficiencies.  The  moral 
purity  of  Jesus  is  strongly  insisted  on  ;  and  the  proof  from 
His  miracles  is  well  brought  out.  But  the  sacrificial  value 
of  His  death  is  not  understood  ;  and  it  would  not  be  difficult, 
by  taking  his  statements  to  pieces,  to  fix  upon  him  the  charge 
of  an  Arianising  tendency,  in  common,  it  must  be  confessed, 
with  several  other  Ante-Nicene  writers.^ 

The  most  successful  portion  of  his  work  is  the  attack  on 
Paganism,  which,  threadbare  as  it  had  become,  he  invests 
with  more  than  ordinary  interest  by  incorporating  several 
legends  entire,  and  letting  us  see  what  they  are  whenf 
divested  of  poetical  dressing.  The  student  who  has  confined 
his  classical  reading  to  the  great  masters,  from  /Eschylus 
to  Aristotle,  and  from  Lucretius  to  Tacitus,  will  scarcely 
be  prepared  for  the  assumption  universally  made  by  the 
Christian  apologists,  that  all  the  absurd  and  immoral  fables 
of  the  poets  must  be  taken  as  they  stand  and  literally 
believed.  The  intellectual  atmosphere  of  the  giants  of 
literature  stands  so  completely  apart  from  these  degrading 
superstitions,  that  we  are  inclined  at  first  sight  to  charge 
the  ecclesiastical  writers  with  wilful  blindness  to  the  higher 
aspects  of  heathenism.  In  order  to  do  them  justice,  it  is 
necessary  to  bear  in  mind  two  important  facts.  First,  that 
the  great  classics  were  lifted  so  far  above  the  mass,  even 
of  their  educated  contemporaries,  as  to  be  very  inadequate 
representatives  of  their  religious  beliefs ;  still  less  did  they 
reflect,  except  in  the  most  distant  manner,  the  currents  of 
popular  superstition.  Secondly,  that  in  the  first  and  second 
centuries  after  Christ  a  very  widespread  and  remarkable 
revival  of  the  religious  spirit  of  Paganism  had  taken  place, 

of  Arnobius,  believes  that  he  had  read  some  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  at  any  rate  the  four  Gospels.  See  vol.  ii.,  p.  450,  of  his  Church 
History. 

1  Irenacus  is  perliaps  the  only  one  to  whose  Christology  no  exception 
can  be  taken  from  the  post-Nieene  standpoint. 


634  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

which  is  clearly  enough  pourtrayed  to  us  in  the  works  of 
less  read  and  second-rate  writers,  but  is  disguised  in  the 
best  authors  under  the  less  recognisable  form  of  Stoic 
philosophy.  The  Christian  apologists,  as  a  rule,  address 
themselves  to  the  mass  of  the  educated  heathen,  not  to  the 
few  choicer  spirits.  Moreover,  they  are  concerned  less  with 
the  theories  of  philosophy  than  with  the  practical  effect  of 
the  accepted  mythology  upon  the  social  and  moral  life  of  the 
people.  Consequently,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  in  expos- 
ing the  immorality  and  incredibility  of  the  Pagan  faith  they 
were  insensible  to  the  efforts  of  its  best  men  for  spiritual 
purification ;  but  they  attacked  what  they  saw  every  day  in 
the  market,  in  the  theatre,  in  the  circus,  in  the  street,  for 
which  in  all  its  moral  hideousness  they  rightly  held  the 
recognised  theology  responsible. 

The  revival  of  religious  feeling  to  which  we  have  alluded 
was  connected  with  a  general  belief  in  the  deterioration  and 
decay  of  the  world.  Men  laboured  everywhere  under  a 
strange  sense  of  misery,  and,  in  their  inability  to  understand 
its  cause,  they  referred  it  to  the  displeasure  of  the  gods. 
Filled  with  unrest  and  despondency,  they  conceived  even 
the  course  of  nature  to  be  affected  with  similar  decrepitude, 
and  in  the  frequent  famines,  earthquakes,  pestilences,  and 
conllagrations,  they  thought  they  saw  unmistakable  evi- 
( dences  of  a  falling  state  of  things.  The  only  new  factor  in 
the  world's  history  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  account  for  this 
change  was  the  rise  of  the  Christian  religion.  Hence  they 
connected  the  two  things  in  their  minds,  and  openly  asserted 
that  Christianity  had  caused  the  offended  gods  to  withdraw 
their  protection  from  the  visible  world,  and  from  man  as  a 
part  of  it. 

This  is  the  first  point  which  Arnobius  sets  himself  to 
answer.  He  begins  by  flatly  denying  it.  He  challenges 
his  opponents  to  produce  any  single  sphere  in  which  the 
natural  secpience  of  cause  and  effect  does  not  still  hold  good. 
He  appeals  to  the  realm  of  nature  and  to  the  evidence  of 
history  to  show  that  physical  catastrophes  and  human  cala- 
mities have   always    existed  in   the   same   proportion;    ami 


ARxoinus.  635 

points  out  that  the  fallacy  arises  from  men's  persisting  in 
measuring  the  universe  by  their  own  standard,  and  in  pro- 
portion as  their  desires  increase,  expecting  the  resources  of 
nature  to  increase  with  them.  As  to  the  Christian  religion 
having  injuriously  affected  the  world,  he  proves  that  the 
greatest  recorded  calamities  all  preceded  its  rise,  while 
during  the  three  centuries  of  its  existence  the  Roman 
Empire  has  grown,  and  the  general  conditions  of  life  have, 
on  the  whole,  greatly  improved.  The  horrors  of  war  have  been 
mitigated,  and,  if  the  precepts  of  Christianity  were  generally 
followed,  would  cease  altogether. 

It  may  not  be  without  interest  to  inquire  briefly  into  the 
psychological  causes  of  this  widespread  belief  in  the  decay 
of  the  age,  a  belief  specially  calculated  to  damp  the  spirits 
and  crush  man's  natural  hopefulness.  It  was  by  no  means 
confined  to  heathens.  S.  Cyprian,  one  of  the  most  vigorous 
spirits  of  the  age,  fully  accepted  it.  In  his  tract  addressed 
to  Demetrius  he  not  only  admits  that  all  things  are  in  a  state 
of  decrejDitude,  but  sets  himself  to  prove  it  in  detail,  and  then 
triumphantly  turns  the  fact  into  a  strong  argument  for  the 
Christian's  warning  that  the  end  of  the  world  is  at  hand,  and 
that  men  must  use  the  brief  respite  which  is  granted  for 
securing  their  salvation. 

The  external  world  is  to  men  only  what  they  make  it  by 
their  perceptions ;  the  phenomena  which  to  the  men  of  those 
days  appeared  beyond  question  objective,  were  in  reality 
altogether  subjective.  We  have  no  reason  to  believe  that 
there  was  any  valid  ground  for  this  universal  persuasion,  the 
causes  of  which  were  of  course  mainly  psychological.  We 
may  instance  three  of  the  princi])al.  In  the  first  place,  the 
constant  wars,  followed  by  the  extinction  of  political  freedom, 
had  resulted  in  the  exhaustion  of  the  race.  The  minds  of 
men  were  less  able  than  they  had  been  to  confront  the  cir- 
cumstances of  their  environment.  Everywhere  a  leaden 
weight  of  administrative  uniformity  depressed  the  spirit, 
and  deadened  that  sense  of  power  which  is  tlie  most  inspir- 
ing stimulus  to  practical  effort.  The  complaint  of  Juvenal 
that  the   earth   brought  forth  poor  and   stunted  specimens 


636  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

of  humanity  was  not  unjust.^  The  brain-power  of  the  world 
was  indeed  enfeebled,  and  despairing'  spirits  read  into  nature 
wliat  they  felt  in  themselves.  Then  again,  the  perfection 
of  the  Imperial  organisation  in  facilitating  intercourse  and 
multiplying  information  was  not  without  its  effect.  The 
vast  complexity  of  materials  on  all  sorts  of  subjects,  social, 
religious,  and  educational,  overwhelmed  men's  minds,  con- 
fined hitherto  within  tlie  narrow  limits  of  nationality,  and 
only  expanding  with  difficulty  to  grasp  the  proportions  of  a 
social  fabric  outwardly  united  but  internally  heterogeneous. 
Moreover,  the  transmission  of  news  from  all  parts  of  the 
Empire,  itself  a  novel  phenomenon,  stunned  men's  imagina- 
tions as  if  by  a  series  of  electric  shocks  ;  tidings  of  calamities 
in  distant  regions  succeeding  one  to  another  with  numbing 
effect,  in  startling  contrast  to  the  self-centred  isolation  of 
former  times.  The  attention,  thus  incessantly  stimulated, 
and  unable  to  co-ordinate  the  mass  of  facts  brought  under  it, 
naturally  concentrated  itself  on  those  of  a  gloomy  type,  and 
by  association  formed  them  into  a  kind  of  law  or  sequence, 
for  which  its  next  step  was  to  invent  a  cause  as  imaginary 
as  its(4f.2 

Another  psychological  fact  of  importance  was  the  growing 
disbelief  in  the  providential  government  of  the  world,  owing 
greatly  to  the  mixing  up  of  religious  systems  which  the 
Empire  entailed. 

The  impotence  of  local  deities  to  protect  their  worshippers 
against  the  miglit  of  Rome  had  not  been  without  a  solvent 
effect  on  people's  belief.  The  disintegrating  process  ran 
on  apace  when  Roman  luxury  and  Roman  ICpicureanism 
invaded  the  provincial  capitals.  By  the  middle  of  the  first 
century  before  Christ  the  provinces,  disappointed  witli  their 
native  faiths  yet  craving  for  a  real  object  of  worship,  had 
already  introduced  the  cult  us  of  material   force  under  the 

^  "  Terra  raalos  homines  nunc  edncat  atque  pusillos." — Sat.  xv.  70. 

-  Even  minds  of  the  highest  order,  as  that  of  Tacitus,  wore  profoundly 
impressed  by  the  apparent  increase  of  physical  catastrojihcs,  due  to  the 
organisation  of  news.  The  demands  made  on  the  attention  of  politicians 
rit  the  present  day  from  the  same  cause  undoubtedly  tend  to  overload  the 
judging  faculty  with  materials,  and  pro  tanto  to  jiaralyse  it. 


ARNOBIUS.  637 

symbol  of  Ca3sarisiii.  This,  at  first  looked  on  with  suspicion, 
then  connived  at,  was  finally  authorised  by  the  Emperors, 
and  long  remained  the  chief  support  of  a  power  that  was 
really  destitute  of  all  spiritual  prerogative.  By  the  third 
century  of  our  era,  the  Divine  government  of  the  world  in 
any  effective  sense  had  ceased  to  be  believed  in.  Ca^'sar  was 
the  symbol  of  omnipotence,  the  present  deity  ;  and  those 
spiritual  instincts,  ineradicable  from  the  heart  of  man,  which 
the  state-cult  failed  to  satisfy,  found  a  sphere  of  exercise  in 
the  countless  mysteries,  secret  rites,  and  esoteric  inteipreta- 
tions  which  experts  of  all  kinds  provided.  In  a  way  the  com- 
parative study  of  religions  was  forced  upon  the  ancient  world. 
For  though  the  modern  student  of  ancient  faiths  may  for 
convenience  group  together  many  systems  under  a  common 
title,  yet  we  must  remember  that  these  systems  really  differed 
as  widely  from  one  another  as  do  the  different  religions  of  the 
present  day  ;  indeed,  several  of  them  were  substantially  the 
same  now  as  they  were  then,  e.g.,  Brahmanism,  Buddhism, 
Zoroastrism.  Hence  an  inquiring  mind  of  that  era,  desirous 
of  searching  all  accessible  channels  of  truth,  would  be  drawn 
over  a  field  not  greatly  inferior  in  complexity  to  that  which 
is  offered  at  the  present  day.  We  have  ourselves  witnessed 
how  slow  has  been  the  recognition  afforded  to  the  comparative 
science  of  religions  in  our  time  ;  and  yet  we  know  how  com- 
pletely that  science  is  in  harmony  with  the  attitude  of  the 
modern  spirit  to  all  subjects  of  inquiry.  It  need  cause  us 
therefore  no  surj^rise  if  to  minds  in  an  earlier  stage  of  history, 
unprepared  for  so  great  a  generalisation,  the  simultaneous 
presentation  of  confiicting  systems  should,  if  not  destroy,  at 
any  rate  disintegrate  and  weaken  all  belief.  These  considera- 
tions will  help  us  to  some  extent  to  understand  how  it  was 
that  the  human  spirit  lost  its  native  buoyancy,  imagined 
itself  forsaken  by  heaven,  and,  driven  to  superstitious  fears, 
strove  to  fix  the  blame  for  its  woes  upon  the  uncongenial 
and  intrusive  element  in  its  midst.  The  answer  of  Arnobius 
to  the  accusing  cry  of  Paganism  is  no  doubt  rational,  and 
from  the  scientific  standpoint  absolutely  conclusive ;  but 
that  of  Cyprian  rings  far  more  true  to  the  Church's  note  of 


638  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

exultation.  In  accepting  the  verdict  of  self-condemnation 
to  which  the  world  had  submitted,  he  turns  it  to  his  own 
advantage,  and  reads  the  lesson  of  Divine  wrath,  which  he 
does  not  deny,  in  a  sense  full  of  terror  for  his  adversaries, 
full  of  triumph  for  his  friends. 

Another  important  argument  which  is  well  handled  by 
Arnobius  is  that  founded  on  the  extent  of  human  ignorance. 
The  reader  of  Butler's  Analogy  will  not  need  to  be  reminded 
of  the  force  with  which  the  bishop  drives  this  home ;  but  we 
are  so  accustomed  to  connect  it  with  the  more  modern  stages 
of  theological  controversy,  that  its  familiar  and  effective  em- 
ployment by  a  writer  so  remote  as  Arnobius  strikes  us  with 
some  suqmse.  IMany  of  the  questions  that  agitated  the 
thinkers  of  antiquity  are  declared  by  Arnobius  to  be  insol- 
uble by  argument.  For  instance,  the  Nature  of  God,  His 
creative  purpose  in  respect  of  man,  the  origin  of  evil,  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  the  mysteries  of  nature,  are  all 
beyond  our  ken.  We  must  be  content  in  these  topics  and 
many  others  to  say,  "  I  know  not :  taught  by  Christ,  I  leave 
these  things  to  God."  We  must  not  wait  for  certainty  ;  but 
(as  Epictetus  says),  "  Seeing  so  great  a  thing  as  the  safety 
of  the  soul  is  at  stake,  I  will  act  without  a  (full)  reason,  lest 
I  fail  altogether,  and  miss  my  end."  ^ 

The  first  two  books  are  more  general,  and  deal  with 
philosophic  theolog}' ;  the  last  five  are  devoted  more  especi- 
I  ally  to  the  exposure  of  prevailing  errors,  and  are  easier  and 
more  entertaining.  Their  amount  of  constructive  truth  is 
but  slender.  The  theology  of  Arnobius  is  more  philosophical 
than  ecclesiastical ;  in  fact,  in  some  points  it  is  inconsistent 
with  the  teaching  of  the  Church — e.g.,  his  Christology  is 
peculiar.  Though  speaking  in  terms  of  glowing  enthusiasm 
of  the  greatness  and  goodness  of  Christ,  and  confessing  Him 

^  In  Book  III.  ch.  19  we  find  the  following  striking  assertion:  "We 
must  not  only  abstain  from  predicating  bodily  attributes  to  God,  but  also 
moral  and  intellectual.  Every  such  predication,  unless  it  is  distinctly 
guarded,  is  anthropomorphism."  He  then  adds  :  "  Unus  est  hominis  intel- 
lectus  de  Dei  natura  certissimus,  si  scias  et  sentias  nihil  de  illo  posse 
mortali  oratione  deprorai."  Cf.  also  Book  II.  ch.  7-10.  In  some  points 
Arnobius  approaches  closely  to  the  standpoint  of  modern  Agnosticism. 


ARNOBIUS.  639 

to  be  truly  God,  he  yet  regards  Ilim  rather  as  the  Divine 
Kevealer  of  the  One  God  than  as  Himself  the  object  of 
worship.  In  Book  I.,  ch.  27,  he  thus  explains  the  Christian's 
position  : — 

"  We  Christians  are  nothing  else  but  worshippers  of  the 
Supreme  King  and  Ruler,  according  to  Christ's  teaching ;  if  you 
examine  our  religion,  that  is  the  whole  gist  of  it.  This  is  the 
goal  of  our  worship,  the  whole  meaning  of  our  devotions;  we 
adore  Him  with  united  prayers,  we  ask  Him  for  things  just  and 
honourable,  and  worthy  for  Him  to  listen  to,  not  because  He 
desires  to  have  us  for  His  suppliants,  or  loves  to  see  so  many 
thousands  prostrate  at  His  feet ;  but  we  do  it  for  our  own 
advantage,  seeking  l^enefit  for  ourselves.  For  since  we  are 
naturally  prone  to  sin,  and  by  our  vicious  appetites  inclined  to 
evil  lusts,  He  permits  Himself  to  be  always  envisaged  by  our 
thoughts,  in  order  that  while  we  pray  to  Him,  and  strive  to  deserve 
His  gifts,  we  may  receive  the  character  of  innocence,  and  by  the 
suppression  of  all  faults  purge  ourselves  of  every  stain." 

This  extract  throws  some  light  on  the  character  of  Arno- 
bius'  belief.  He  is  evidently  nearer  to  philosophic  theism 
than  to  the  popular  Christianity  of  his  day.  His  views  on 
prayer  are  compatible  with  doubts  of  its  efficacy  in  changing 
the  order  of  causation  ;  and  they  show  a  very  imperfect  grasp 
of  the  truth  of  our  communion  with  God.  In  other  places, 
it  is  true,  he  speaks  of  intercessory  prayer  as  a  Christian 
duty;  but  his  scientific  bias  makes  the  common  view  of 
particular  providences  distasteful  to  him,  and  he  prefers  to 
regard  the  action  of  the  Deity  upon  man  as  that  of  a  spiritual 
influence  acting  only  through  the  will. 

It  is  in  his  theories  about  the  soul  that  he  departs  furthest 
from  the  orthodox  standard.  He  will  not  admit  the  creation 
of  man  to  be  directly  the  work  of  God,  but  inclines  to 
attribute  it  to  an  intermediate  agency,  not  that  of  God  the 
Son,  in  accordance  with  the  Nicene  creed,  but  of  some 
angelic  and  tlierefore  imperfect  Nature.^     Consistently  witli 

^  His  words  arc  (Book  II.  ch.  36) :  *'  Si  eniui  forte  nescitis  et  antea  vobis 
incognitum  jMopter  rei  novitatem  fuit,  accipite  scro  vt  discite  ab  eo  qui 
novit  et  j)rotulit  in  modiuni  Cliristo,  11011  esse  aiiimas  regis  inaxinii  filias, 


640  LATIX   CHRISTIANITY. 

this,  he  denies  the  inherent  immortality  of  the  soul,  affirming 
that  those  souls  only  are  everlasting  on  which  from  their 
holiness  God  confers  the  gift  of  permanence.  To  the  soul 
itself  he  attributes  a  media  qnalitas  between  matter  and 
spirit,  and  denies  the  view  that  man  is  necessary  to  the 
universe ;  still  less  that  he  is  the  end  and  object  of  it. 

About  angels  he  says  little,  though  he  believes  in  their 
existence.  But  he  accepts  the  common  theory  that  the 
heathen  gods  were  demons,^  and  accuses  them  of  jealousy 
in  refusing  to  permit  the  worship  of  the  true  God.  He 
hardly  seems  to  realise,  what  heathendom  felt  from  the 
first,  the  absolute  exclusiveness  of  the  Christian  faith,  and 
therefore  its  absolute  incompatibility  with  the  existence  of 
idolatry  anywhere. 

One  of  the  best  points  he  makes  is  when  he  proves  that 
heathen  thinkers,  such  as  Cicero  and  Varro,  while  professing 
to  elucidate  theology,  have  really  annihilated  the  popular 
creed  ;  and,  indirectly,  he  does  good  service  by  showing  how 
their  destructive  criticism  prepared  the  way  for  higher  know- 
ledge. The  web  of  contradictions  in  which  he  involves  the 
current  justification  of  idolatry  is  interesting  as  a  speci- 
men of  clever  argument ;  but  such  weapons  are  two-edged, 
and  belong  rather  to  the  sphere  of  nature  than  to  that  of 
grace. 

On   the  whole,  while   admitting  the  value  of  his  protest 

nee  ab  eo  quemadraodum  dicitur,  generatas  coepisse  se  nosse,  atque  in 
sui  nominis  essentia  praedicari,  sed  alterum  quempiam  genitorem  his 
esse,  dignitatis  et  potentiae  gradibus  satis  plurimis  ab  Imperatore 
disiunctum  ;  ejus  tamen  ex  aula  et  eminentium  sublimitate  natalium 
nobilem."  The  reader  will  not  need  to  be  informed  that  Arnobius  is  here 
not  merely  unorthodox  but  historically  incorrect.  Our  Lord  never  uses 
any  words  which  can  be  drawn  into  implying  that  souls  are  not  the 
immediate  creation  of  God.  It  is  clear  that  Arnobius  was  not  wholly  free 
from  Gnostic  conceptions  of  the  relation  of  the  Supreme  God  to  the 
material  world.  Possibly  the  reference  here  may  be  to  one  of  the  Gnosti- 
cising  Apoc'ryj)hal  Gospels. 

^  S.  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corintliians  asserts  that  an  idol  is  nothing 
at  all  ;  and  that  therefore  meats  sacrificed  to  idols  may  be  eaten  by  such 
as  realise  this.  But  in  another  place  he  seems  to  endorse  the  popular 
view  that  the  heathen  sacrificed  to  demons.  This  view,  though  common 
to  all  the  Fathers,  is  Jewish  in  its  origin. 


ARNOBIUS.  641 

against  heathenism,  and  the  sincerity  of  his  Christian  con- 
victions, we  cannot  agree  with  those  ^  who  complain  that 
the  neglect  into  which  he  has  fallen  is  wholly  undeserved. 
The  intense  interest  which  surrounds  the  efforts  of  Greek 
philosophers  to  find  out  God,  and  the  inferior  but  still  power- 
ful charm  which  invests  even  the  second-hand  products  of 
Roman  thought,  do  not  extend  to  the  semi-philosophical, 
semi-religious  discussions  of  this  partially  instructed  Christian, 
who  has  neither  the  metaphysical  depth  of  Origen,  nor  the 
uncompromising  ardour  of  Tertullian,  and  who  has  bequeathed 
to  us  only  the  elegant  refutation  of  an  already  dying  system, 
and  a  rhetorical  statement  of  Christian  truth,  both  incom- 
plete and  imperfectly  apprehended. 

The  literary  student  and  the  antiquarian,  on  the  other  hand, 
will  find  in  him  much  to  repay  their  study.  His  flowing  and 
musical  style,  rich  in  varied  luxuriance  and  bursts  of  fine 
eloquence,  proves  how  flourishing  a  height  the  schools  of 
African  rhetoric  had  attained.  And  the  multitude  of  quaint 
words,  especially  in  lists  of  common  objects,  which  he  piles 
together  with  the  consciousness  of  an  unrivalled  vocabulary,  ' 
are  a  mine  of  interest  for  the  lexicographer.  His  Latinity, 
though  not  pure,  is  far  superior  to  that  of  Tertullian  in 
clearness  and  neatness  ;  and  has  been  compared,  not  without 
justice,  to  that  of  Apuleius,  though  it  is  neither  so  brilliant 
nor  so  thickly  studded  with  recherchd  ornaments.  As  a  man 
of  science,  his  chief  defect  is  an  inability  to  grasp  the  differ- 
ence between  problems  that  are  really  beyond  the  reach  of 
the  human  mind,  and  such  as,  like  those  of  physical  science, 
are  discoverable  by  the  use  of  a  true  method.  His  wise 
maxim,  therefore,  that  we  should  in  theorising  always  bear 
in  mind  the  extent  of  human  ignorance,  requires  to  be 
supplemented  by  the  conclusions  of  the  critical  philosopher, 
which  confine  it  to  the  domain  of  the  transcendental,  and  do 
not  allow  it  to  affect  the  vast  extent  of  knowledge  to  which 
our  faculties  may  legitimately  aspire.- 

^  E.g.y  Woodham,  in  Preface  to  TertuUiaii's  Apology. 
-  In  some  points  he  is  beyond  his  a^e  ;  e.g.,  he  sees  tlie  jjossibility  of 
contradictory  propositions  being  put  forward  witli  equal  a  priori  plausi- 

2   S 


642  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

In  the  field  of  anticjuarianism,  he  supplies  much  that  is  of 
value.  We  are  indebted  to  him  for  the  preservation  of 
several  interesting  legends,  and  many  details  of  religious 
ceremonial  and  obscure  rites  of  worship.  He  is  a  man  of 
real  learning,  and  knows  how  to  bring  it  to  bear.  Unlike 
Minucius,  he  is  not  an  imitator,  but  thinks  for  himself,  and 
uses  his  own  modes  of  statement.  He  would  scarcely  seem 
to  have  read  Tertullian,  with  whose  mind  and  genius  he  has 
little  in  common.  From  one  sentence,  where  he  asks  the 
rulers  to  be  content  with  rejecting  the  Christian  arguments 
without  proceeding  to  treat  those  who  use  them  as  criminals, 
we  should  infer  that  he  had  read  the  Apology  of  Justin. 
If  so,  he  must  have  appreciated  that  most  sympathetic  and 
reasonable  of  Christian  philosophers.  He  is  said  to  have 
numbered  Lactantius  among  his  pupils,  but  this  fact  is 
slenderly  attested,  and  questions  of  chronology  make  it 
doubtful.  What  part,  if  any,  he  took  in  the  Church's  life ; 
whether  he  wrote  other  apologetic  works  ;  when  he  died  ;  are 
all  questions  to  which  we  can  give  no  answer.  It  is  possible 
he  may  have  followed  the  example  of  Justin  in  allowing 
himself  to  be  approached  at  any  time  for  puq^oses  of  discus- 
sion, and  so  have  succeeded  in  interesting  men  of  intelligence 
and  education  in  the  tenets  of  Christianity  and  the  salvation 
of  their  souls.  He  certainly  did  not  enter  the  ministry,  but 
must  be  ranked  along  with  Justin,  Tertullian,  Minucius  and 
Lactantius  among  those  lay  teachers  who,  by  simply  keeping 
in  touch  with  the  educated  outside  world,  have  done  excellent 
service  to  the  Church. 


Lactantius. 

The  last  of  the  Latin  a]iologists,  and  by  far  the  most 
generally  popular,  is  Lactantius  Firmianus,  who  in  several 
MSS.   has  the  pracnomen  and  nomen  Lucius  Coecilius  (or 

bility  on  many  important  subjects,  e.g.,  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  the 
corporeity  of  God,  &c.  It  was  a  clear  perception  of  this  fact  that  led  Kant 
to  his  statement  of  the  antinomies  of  the  pure  reason,  and  the  discovery 
of  the  critical  philosophy. 


LACTANTIUS.  643 

Caelius)  ascribed  to  him.  His  nationality  is  uncertain.  From 
the  name  Firmianns,  some  have  conjectured  that  he  came 
from  Firmium  in  Italy.  But  this  conjecture  is  unnecessary, 
as  Firmus  was  the  name  of  several  small  towns  in  Numidia, 
and  the  evidence  we  have  all  points  to  Africa,  rather  than  to 
Italy,  as  his  native  country. 

As  we  have  already  said,  S.  Jerome's  statement  that  he  was 
a  pupil  of  Arnobius  at  Sicca,  though  possibly  true,  cannot 
be  accepted  as  certain.  Whoever  was  his  master,  he  was 
trained  in  an  admirable  school ;  and  the  moderation  of  his 
judgment  and  the  beauty  of  his  style  prove  that  even  in  that 
period  of  decline  there  were  teachers  who  knew  how  to 
impress  on  their  pupils  both  these  great  excellences.  Lac- 
tantius  is  in  no  sense  an  original  thinker.  His  gifts  are 
brilliant  enough  in  their  way.  He  has  a  powerful  memory, 
an  acute  logical  method,  a  clear  grasp  of  his  subject,  a 
penetrating  analysis,  and  a  sound  judgment.  His  power  of 
exjiression,  naturally  very  great,  was  brought  to  perfection 
by  earnest  study  of  the  best  models,  especially  Cicero,  to 
whose  philosophical  style  his  own  bears  no  small  resemblance. 
A  conscientious  laboriousness,  which  will  be  content  with 
nothing  short  of  the  best  it  can  produce,  is  the  secret  of  his 
success.  His  natural  temperament  was  melancholy  and  some- 
what austere.  Though  not  ascetic  in  his  views,  he  inclines 
always  to  the  sterner  side ;  and  we  find  in  him  a  survival  of 
the  old  Roman  gravitas,  rare  among  his  Italian  contemporaries, 
and  rarer  still  among  African  writers. 

His  reputation  as  a  teacher  of  rhetoric  stood  so  high  that 
about  the  year  290  Diocletian  appointed  him  professor  of 
eloquence  in  his  new  capital  of  Nicomedia,  which  he  had 
resolved  should  be  the  intellectual  as  well  as  the  political 
equal  of  Rome.  Apparently  the  duties  of  the  post  were 
not  very  burdensome.  Whether  Lactantius  felt  a  growing 
disinclination  for  his  somewhat  unsatisfactory  profession,  or 
whether  he  was  taken  up  with  philosophical  and  religious 
questions,  he  does  not  seem  to  have  had  many  pupils.  Some 
time  between  A.i).  290  and  303  ho  was  converted  to  Cliristi- 
anity.     In  this  latter  year  the  great  persecution  broke  out. 


644  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

Lactantius  threw  himself  into  the  work  of  defence,  and  wrote 
against  Ilierocles,  the  governor  of  l)itliynia,  who  was  the 
chief  instigator  of  the  persecution,  and  had  himself  written 
two  treatises  against  Christianity.  To  what  causes  he  owed 
his  own  immunity  during  those  ten  terrible  years,  we  know 
not.  Possibly  the  em])eror's  friendship  may  have  shielded 
him,  or  perhaps  hv  may  have  been  looked  on  rather  as  a 
Christianising  philosopher  than  as  a  bona  fide  Christian. ^ 
When  Constantino  obtained  the  supreme  power,  Lactantius, 
tlien  in  advanced  age,  was  sent  for  by  him  to  Gaul  to 
])reside  over  the  education  of  his  eldest  son  Crispus,  whom 
Constantine  designated  Ca3sar  and  destined  as  his  successor 
(A.D.  317).  He  died  at  Treves  (about  A.D.  325)  in  extreme 
old  age,  and,  according  to  Eusebius,  in  the  greatest  poverty. 
His  philosophy  was  of  that  practical  type  which  resists  all 
the  enticements  of  luxury  and  all  the  opportunities  of  wealth. 
He  was  so  completely  free  from  ambition  that  he  never 
once  alludes  to  the  high  position  his  merit  had  won ;  and 
altogether  he  must  be  pronounced,  so  far  as  our  scanty 
information  extends,  a  thoroughly  consistent  example  of  a 
true  Christian  philosopher. 

The  writings  that  have  come  down  to  us  under  his  name 
are  tolerably  numerous.  The  first  and  most  important  is 
the  Seven  Books  of  Divine  InstihUions,  the  title  of  which  is 
borrowed  from  the  Institutions  of  Civil  Law,  so  frequently 
issued  under  the  Empire.  The  date  of  this  work  is  uncer- 
tain ;  but  it  seems  clear  that  lie  wrote  it  while  in  Bithynia, 
probably  between  311  and  314,  which  latter  year  is  the 
earliest  assignable  date  for  his  migration  to  Gaul.  AVliile  in 
Gaul,  he  revised  the  Listitutions,  adding  the  addresses  to 
Constantine,  and  several  allusions  to  events  posterior  to  their 
first  publication.  He  also  condensed  them  into  an  Ejntoine, 
according  to  the  fashion  of  tlie  times,  for  tlie  ben<^fit  of  such 

^  It  is  not  absolutely  certain  that  his  conversion  took  place  so  early  as 
A.I).  303.  His  friend  Donatus,  afterwards  the  celebrated  bishop,  suffered 
torture  and  a  six  years'  imprisonment  in  Nicomedia.  His  release  in  311, 
under  the  edict  of  Galerius,  may  jwssibly  have  been  the  occasion  of  Lac- 
tantius' open  profession  of  Christianity  ;  but  undoubtedly  he  had  resolved 
to  ^^ive  up  heathenism  some  years  before. 


LACTANTIUS.  645 

as  found  the  entire  treatise  too  long  or  too  difficult  to  master. 
He  speaks  of  it  as  a  "  Headless  Book  "  {Acej^halus),  alluding 
to  the  omission  of  the  introductory  disquisition  on  the  causes 
of  error,  which  fills  the  first  three  books  of  the  Institutions. 
The  language  and  style  are  simpler  than  in  the  larger  work ; 
and  the  latter  part  (beginning  with  the  fiftj^-sixth  chapter), 
which  deals  chiefly  with  the  moral  aspects  of  Christianity, 
forms  an  admirable  popular  compendium  of  religious  ethics. 

The  next  extant  work  is  that  "On  the  Anger  of  God "  (de  Ira 
Dei)  alluded  to  in  the  Institutions,  in  which  he  proves,  in 
opposition  to  the  Epicureans,  that  the  Divine  character  is 
capable  of  just  resentment,  and  that  our  conception  of  it 
would  be  imperfect  unless  we  included  this  attribute.  This 
work  is  highly  praised  by  S.  Jerome,  and  compared  with  the 
dialogues  of  Cicero.  The  reader  will  recall  the  striking 
sermons  of  Butler  on  Resentment  and  the  Love  of  God.  Its 
date  is  uncertain,  perhaps  about  A.D.  320. 

Another  treatise  of  ]Dopular  interest  is  that  "  On  the 
Workmanship  of  God  "  (de  Opificio  Dei).  This  belongs  to 
an  earlier  period,  during  the  persecution  of  Diocletian,  and 
is  addressed  to  one  Demetrianus.  It  is  in  twenty  chapters, 
and  is  divided  into  two  parts,  the  first  containing  a  very  full 
and  learned  account  of  the  anatomy  of  the  human  body,  the 
second  a  short  discussion  on  the  nature  of  the  soul.  Its 
object  is  theological,  in  opposition  to  the  EjDicurean  philosophy. 
The  impossibility  of  obtaining  human  bodies  for  dissection 
compels  him  to  found  many  of  his  arguments  on  the  analogy 
of  the  lower  animals;  and  the  mysterious  nature  of  the 
bodily  mechanism  is  asserted  with  great  emphasis  in  proof 
of  the  inscrutability  of  the  Divine  l^ower.  Like  Arnobius, 
he  falls  into  the  error  of  supposing  that  these  subjects  are 
essentially  unknowable,  and  draws  inferences  favourable  to 
religious  reverence,  but  inconsistent  with  the  claims  of 
science  and  philosophy.  Nevertheless,  it  is  sur]irising  how 
wide  his  knowledge  was,  and  liow  accurately  he  lirul  informed 
himself  on  many  higlily  technical  points.  JIc  uidu'sitatingly 
adopts  the  Creationist  view  of  the  soul,  affirming  it  to  be  the* 
immediate  workmanship  of  God  without  human  co-operation. 


646  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

The  treatise  may  be  taken  as  a  comment  on  the  Psalmist's 
words,  *'I  will  give  thanks  unto  Thee,  for  I  am  fearfully  and 
wonderfully  made :  marvellous  are  Thy  works,  and  that  my 
soul  knoweth  right  well." 

The  last  of  the  genuine  writings  of  Lactantius  which  we 
possess  is  a  tract  partly  historical,  partly  religious,  "  On  the 
Deaths  of  Persecutors  "  {de  Mortihus  Persecutorum).  It  gives 
a  brief  rdsitind  of  the  history  of  persecution  from  the  time  of 
Nero  to  his  own  day ;  with  the  object  of  proving  that  all  the 
emperors  who  authorised  persecution  were  punished  by  the 
Divine  Justice  in  the  manner  of  their  deaths.  The  earlier 
examples  are  hurriedly  enumerated :  Nero,  Domitian,  Decius, 
Valerian,  Aurelian :  Diocletian  is  spoken  of  at  more  length, 
but  the  greater  part  of  the  work  is  occupied  with  the  histor^^  of 
Maximianus,  whose  defeat  by  Licinius  and  fearful  death  are 
described  with  graphic  power.  This  work  shows  Lactantius 
in  a  new  light  as  compared  with  those  we  have  hitherto 
considered.  He  appears  as  the  stern  and  triumphant  justifier 
of  the  Divine  vengeance,  and  loses  altogether  his  usual  calm 
equanimity  in  horror  at  the  sufferings  he  depicts  and  the 
guilt  that  inflicted  them.  Besides  its  apologetic  value  to  the 
Church,  the  book  is  useful  also  to  the  historical  student. 

Some  important  writings  of  Lactantius  have  perished,  as 
the  Treatise  on  Gratnviar,^  which  belonged  to  his  heathen 
days ;  the  Itinerari/,-  a  poetical  account  in  hexameters  of  his 
journey  from  Africa  to  Bithynia,  also  belonging  to  the  same 
period  (a.D.  290}  ;  two  books  addressed  to  a  friend  named 
Asclepiades,  to  whom  he  also  wrote  a  short  treatise  On  Pro- 
vidence ;  3  two  books  of  Letters  to  Demetrianus,  written  during 
the  Diocletian  persecution.  These  last  may  yet  be  recovered, 
as  they  were  known  to  be  in  existence  during  the  latter  half 
of  the  sixteenth  century.  Besides  these  he  wrote,  after  his 
removal  to  Gaul,  two  books  of  Letters  to  Sever  us,  a  Spanish 
friend,  and  four  of  J^etters  to  I'rohns,  wlio  was  probably  a 
Konian  resident  in  Gaul. 

We  possess  further  a  trilling  collection   of  one   hundred 

'    (Irnmmatioia,  or  "the  (iraiiiniarian  "  -  oSonropiKdy. 

•'   /><  suinnia  I>ei  Priividrntiit. 


LACTANTIUS.  647 

riddles  in  hexameter  verse,  under  the  title  of  Symposium, 
ascribed  to  Lactantius.  There  is  no  doubt  that  in  his  youth- 
ful days  he  wrote  a  poem  with  this  title ;  but  the  extant 
lines  arc  unworthy  of  his  reputation,  and,  in  the  absence  of 
more  satisfactory  attestation,  we  decline  to  pronounce  them 
genuine.  It  is  otherwise  with  the  Phcenix,  an  elegiac  study, 
which  exhibits  much  neatness  of  style,  and  may  very  possibly 
have  been  written  by  him  in  his  earlier  academic  days.  The 
poems  On  the  PascJia  and  the  Passion  of  Christ,  which  used  to 
be  printed  among  his  works,  are  undoubtedly  spurious. 

His  Divine  Institutions. 

It  will  be  sufficient  to  give  a  short  account  of  the  Institu- 
tions as  a  specimen  of  his  genius,  and  as  being  the  work  on 
which  his  fame  rests.  It  is  intended,  as  the  title  implies,  not 
merely  as  a  refutation  of  heathen  error,  but  as  an  exposition 
of  Christian  doctrine.  Its  scope,  therefore,  is  far  more  ambi- 
tious than  that  of  the  Octavius  or  that  of  Amobius'  Dis- 
putations. As  a  work  of  constructive  theology,  it  must  be  1 
pronounced  highly  interesting,  but  extremely  deficient.  S. 
Jerome  points  this  out  in  the  following  words:  "Would 
that  he  had  been  able  to  state  the  Christian  position  as 
satisfactorily  as  he  demolishes  the  heathen  one."  ^ 

The  work  is  divided  into  seven  hooks.  The  first  two  are 
concerned  with  proving  the  falsehood  of  Polytheism.  He 
states  his  object  in  writing  to  be  the  desire  to  assist  those 
who  were  in  earnest  in  the  pursuit  of  truth,  but  who  had  not 
been  led  to  investigate  the  claims  of  Christianit}^ ;  and  also 
to  encourage  those  who  were  inclined  to  accept  the  Christian 
revelation,  but  feared  the  imputation  of  ignorance  or  want  of 
polite  culture.  lie  points  out  how  much  higher  is  the  func- 
tion of  a  moral  and  spiritual  teacher  than  that  of  a  professor 
of  rhetoric,  and  how  greatly  theology  excels  philosophy,  even 
as  righteousness  excels  intellect. 

The  second  book  deals  specially  witli  the  source  of  error  in 

*  "Utinam  tam  nostra  afTirmare  potuisset  quam  facile  aliena  destruxit." 

— S.  Jerom-e,  Ep.  58,  10,  ud  PauUuxim. 


648  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

false  conceptions  about  the  Deity,  covering  very  much  the 
same  ground  as  does  Arnobius. 

The  third  book  contrasts  the  truths  of  theology  with  the 
misleading  wisdom  of  philosophy  and  eloquence  :  and  in  this 
the  writer  is  seen  at  his  best.  His  extensive  learning,  his 
real  sympathy  with  the  purest  heathen  thought,  his  pas- 
sionate admiration  for  eloquence,  all  combine  to  qualify  him 
in  a  very  high  degree  for  this  branch  of  his  undertaking, 
while  the  moderation  of  his  censure  contrasts  favourably 
with  the  violent  attacks  of  TertuUian  on  those  who,  whatever 
their  errors,  were  undoubtedly  seekers  after  God. 

The  fourth  book  commences  the  positive  side  of  his  teach- 
ing. He  shows  that  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  are  built 
upon  the  Person  of  Christ.  Separate  sections  are  devoted  to 
an  investigation  of  the  prophetic  annunciation  of  Messiah,  of 
Christ's  Divine  pre-existence,  of  His  ineffable  Name,  of  His 
Incarnation,  of  His  double  Nature,  of  His  miracles,  passion, 
resurrection  and  glorification.  The  argument  advanced  on 
behalf  of  the  Divine  and  human  natures  of  Christ  is  as 
follows : — 

"  Wlioever  issues  commands  touchini^  conduct  should  himself 
observe  them,  that  men  may  both  see  them  to  be  practicable  and 
entertain  a  proper  respect  for  their  author.  Moreover,  He  should 
be  from  above,  since  no  earthly  teacher  can  have  sufficient  autho- 
rity or  knowledge  of  man's  heart :  but  He  should  wear  a  mortal 
form,  in  order  that  raen  may  be  able  to  endure  Ilis  presence,  which 
they  could  not  do  if  He  appeared  as  Cod,  and  also  that  they  may 
be  without  the  excuse  they  would  otherwise  have  for  sinning." 

Christ  alone  can  be  proved  to  have  fulfilled  these  condi- 
tions. The  reason  of  His  becoming  man  was  to  give  us  a  per- 
fect example  ;  the  reason  of  ilis  suffering  was  to  teach  us  that 
wisdom  and  holiness  would  always  be  hated  and  oppressed  by 
man,  and  to  encourage  us  to  endure  as  He  endured.  The 
reasons  of  His  dying  on  the  Cross  were  ;  that  no  man,  however 
humble,  should  be  unable  to  follow  His  example ;  that  His 
Body  might  be  preserved  entin^  for  the  Resurrection,  which 
it  would  not  have  been  had  He  been  decapitated  ;  and  that 


LACTANTIUS.  649 

by  the  publicity  of  His  death  the  whole  world  might  be 
brought  to  hear  of  Him.  The  power  of  the  Cross  is  shown 
by  the  expulsion  of  demons  and  the  exposure  of  magicians : 
and  its  effect  is  the  overthrow  of  false  religious  and  the  im- 
planting of  the  true  knowledge  of  God.^ 

Beautiful  as  this  ])ortion  of  his  work  is,  and  full  of  subdued 
but  striking  eloquence,  its  utter  inadequacy  from  a  spiritual 
and  theological  point  of  view  will  be  at  once  apparent.  The 
ground  he  takes  is  throughout  philosophical  rather  than 
religious;  indeed,  on  several  occasions  he  expressly  speaks 
of  Christianity  as  "  the  true  philosophy."  In  this  aspect 
the  doctrine  of  Christ's  Atoning  Sacrifice  would  be  out  of 
place,  seeing  that  it  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  things  inex]Dli- 
cable  by  human  reason. 

The  latter  part  of  the  book  contains  a  discussion  of  the 
relation  of  God  the  Father  to  God  the  Son.  He  is  fully 
aware  of  the  difficulty  of  so  presenting  this  doctrine  as  not 
to  conflict  with  the  supreme  truth  of  the  Unity  of  God. 
And  the  most  striking  feature  in  his  argument,  as  well  as 
apparently  the  most  original,  is  the  parallel  he  draws  between 
the  Unity  of  the  Godhead  in  two  Persons  and  the  usage  of 
Roman  law,  by  which  a  father  may  so  delegate  his  authority 
to  an  only  son  as  to  enable  the  latter  to  assume  in  a  legal 
sense  his  father's  personality.  He  also  applies  the  analogy 
of  the  civil  law  with  great  aptness  to  explain  the  twofold 
relationship  of  God  to  man  as  at  once  his  Father  and  his 
Master.  The  Roman  burgess,  he  reminds  us,  is  legally  the 
owner  of  his  sons  as  well  as  of  his  slaves,  and  the  father  of 
his  slaves  as  well  as  of  his  sons.  The  title  Paterfamilias, 
"  father  of  the  household,"  is  no  empty  name ;  it  implies  at 
once  a  legal  status  and  a  moral  relationship.  Hence  a  slave, 
when  enfranchised,  is  obliged  to  assume  the  name  of  his  lat^ 
owner,  who  in  turn  becomes  i\iQ  patronus  or  father-at-law  of 
his  former  chattel ;  while  the  son  needs  the  legal  ceremony 
of  emancipation  as  truly  as  the  slave  in  order  to  beconu^  sui 
juriSy  or  independent. 

The  fifth  book  contaius  a  summary  of  the  etliical  code 
'  Book  IV,  cliaps.  xxiii.-xxviii. 


650  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

of  Christianity,  wliich  calls  for  no  particular  comment.  It 
closes  with  an  eloquent  vindication  of  Christians  from  the 
charges  and  misapprehensions  of  which  they  were  so  generally 
the  oV)jects. 

The  sixth  book  treats  of  the  true  worship  of  God,  more, 
liowever,  from  a  philosophico-religious  standpoint  than  from 
tliat  of  revelation  pure  and  simple.  It  includes  the  familiar 
doctrine  of  The  Two  Ways,  which  we  can  trace  as  far  back 
as  the  apostolic  DidacM  at  the  close  of  the  first  century. 

The  last  book  treats  of  the  Happy  Life,  including  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  Sicmmicm  Bonum,  or  chief  good  for  man, 
which,  in  accordance  with  our  Lord's  teaching,  he  declares 
to  be  eternal  life.  He  then  proceeds  to  the  question  of 
man's  future  destiny,  in  which  he  betrays  decided  millena- 
rian  proclivities,  and  is  led  into  various  peculiar  views  from 
his  interpretation  of  the  Apocalypse,  a  book  for  which  he 
evidently  had  a  strong  predilection.  He  concludes  with  a 
fine  peroration,  in  which  he  thankfully  acknowledges  the 
goodness  of  God  in  giving  the  Church  peace  at  last  under 
the  protection  of  a  Christian  emperor,  and  exhorts  all  men 
to  turn  from  error  without  delay,  lest  the  impending  judgment 
come  upon  them  unawares. 

Theologians  have  detected  many  Haws  in  his  orthodoxy. 
It  cannot  be  denied  that  he  is  unsatisfactory  in  his  definition 
of  the  Godhead  of  Christ ;  that  his  theory  of  the  part  assigned 
to  angels  in  the  government  of  mankind  is  unscriptural  and 
unwarranted;  and  that  his  omission  of  all  mention  of  the 
Third  Person  of  the  Blessed  Trinity  is  a  grave  theological 
defect.  In  fact,  as  has  already  been  stated,  his  contribution 
to  Christian  dogma  is  of  little  theological  value.  It  is  rather 
to  his  earnestness,  his  purity  of  spirit,  and  his  soundness  of 
moral  judgment,  that  he  owes  his  high  position  as  a  Christian 
writer. 

A  few  words  may  be  added  on  the  subject  of  his  literary 

merits,  which  are  universally  allowed  to  be  very  great.     As 

(  a  truly  elocjuent  philosopher,  and  a  writer  of  pure  prose,  he 

ranks  among  the  best  authors  of  the  Latin  Church.    His  style 

is  consi)icuous  for  its  calm  and  ecjuable  How,  its  transparent 


COMMODIAN.  651 

clearness,  aud  its  success  in  embodying  with  the  greatest 
precision  all  the  steps  of  a  long  and  elaborate  argument. 
Few  Church  writers  have  attained  so  wide  a  popularity,  as  is 
evidenced  by  the  large  number  of  ^ISS.  in  which  his  writings 
are  preserved,  and  the  numerous  editions  of  his  works,  of 
which  over  sixty  had  already  appeared  before  the  close  of 
the  eighteenth  century. 

At  the  present  time  he  is  less  read.  The  spirit  of  research 
is  more  occupied  with  the  great  original  authorities  than  with 
those  who  confined  themselves  to  the  task  of  second-hand 
exposition.  At  the  same  time,  those  who  are  not  deterred 
by  the  complexity  of  his  subject  and  the  obscurity  of  some 
of  his  arguments,  will  find  him  a  pleasant  and  instructive 
companion,  if  not  always  a  safe  religious  guide. 

We  have  now  concluded  our  review  of  the  Ante-Nicene 
apologists  of  the  Latin  Church.  We  have  to  notice  that  the 
greater  part  of  them  were  laymen,  highly  educated,  of  liberal 
and  enlightened  minds,  thoroughly  versed  in  all  the  ques- 
tions and  controversies  of  their  day.  Judged  by  the  rigid 
theology  of  the  subsequent  epoch,  they  must  be  pronounced 
imperfectly  instructed  in  the  faith.  At  the  same  time,  they 
testify  to  the  toleration  in  the  Latin  Church  of  broad  views 
and  a  philosophical  freedom  of  discussion  which  unhapi^ly 
soon  gave  place  to  a  despotic  restriction  of  belief  within 
certain  prescribed  limits,  and  culminated  in  the  acceptance 
of  the  Augustinian  system,  not  as  being  the  brilliant  and 
powerful  effort  of  a  single  gifted  mind  to  embrace  the  whole 
sphere  of  revealed  knowledge,  but  as  being  the  authoritative 
and  final  pronouncement  of  the  Universal  Cliurch  on  all 
questions  of  Divine  truth. 

Commodian. 

We  conclude  our  chapter  with  a  brief  notice  of  two  insigni- 
ficant writers  of  this  period,  the  quasi-]ioet  Commodianus, 
and  the  Scripture  commentator  Victorinus  Petaviensis. 
The  nationality  of  the   former  is  disputed,  l)uf  tliere  seems 


652  LATIN   CHRISTIANITY. 

little  doubt  that  he  was  an  African.  He  may  have  lived  in 
the  latter  lialf  of  the  third  century.  From  his  style  and 
habit  of  thought,  we  should  conjecture  that  he  belonged  to 
the  lower  class  and  had  been  imperfectly  educated.^  His 
extant  works  comprise  two  poems,  one  called  Carmen  Apolo- 
geticum^  directed  against  both  Jews  and  heathens,  containing 
1060  lines,  first  printed  by  I^itra  in  1852.  It  is  defective  at 
the  close,  and  has  no  title  or  author's  name  prefixed.  The 
similarity  of  its  diction  to  that  of  Commodian's  undoubted 
work  proves  it  to  be  his.  The  Instructionc>>  per  litteras  versuv  m 
privias,  in  two  books,  bears  the  author's  name.  Each  book 
contains  a  series  of  acrostics,  embodying  some  subject  of 
instruction  which  is  given  in  the  title,  and  worked  out  verse 
by  verse,  until  the  letters  of  the  title  are  completed.  As  an 
example  of  his  method  and  poetical  gifts  we  select  No.  28, 
from  Book  T.,  on  the  Resurrection  of  the  Just  : — 

JusTi  Kesurgent. 

"  Iiistitia  et  bonitas,  i)ax  et  patientia  vera 
Vivere  post  fata  facient,  et  cura  de  actii  : 
Subdola  mens  aiitein,  noxia,  perfida,  prava, 
Tollit  se  ill  partes,  et  fera  iiiorte  moratiir. 
Impie  nunc  audi,  (piid  ])er  malefacta  lucraris, 
Respice  terrenos  indices,  in  corpoie  tjui  nunc 
Excruciant  jwenis  diros  :  aut  ferro  jtarentiir 
Supplicifi  nieritis  aut  longo  carcere  Here. 
Ultime  tu  speras  Deuni  irridere  caelestem 
Rectoremque  poli,  per  qneni  sunt  omnia  facta  ? 
(irassaris,  insanis,  detractas  nunc  et  Dei  nomen  ? 
Unde  non  effugies,  ]>oenas  per  factacpie  ])onet. 
Nunc  volo  sis  caiitus,  ne  veni;ts  ignis  in  aestum. 
Trade  tc  iam  Christ o,  lit  te  benefacta  se(inantur." 

The  Latin  scholar  will  observe  that  neither  syntax  nor 
metre  satisfies  the  classical  standard.  The  poetical  merit  of 
the  composition  is  even  lower  than  the  technical. 

^  It  is  curious  that  of  all  the  writers  we  liave  passed  under  review, 
only  three  appear  to  have  belonged  to  the  imperfectly  educated  classes, 
Hernias,  Polycrates,  and  Commodiim.  The  other  writers,  however  limited 
their  intellectual  gifts,  all  seem  to  have  mastered  the  art  of  correct  writing. 
This  is  no  small  testimony  to  the  widespread  influence  of  the  Hellenic 
culture. 


VICTORINUS.  653 

Victorinus  of  Petavia  (Pettau  iu  Styria)  is  mentioned 
by  S.  Jerome  as  a  bishop,  who,  although  Greek  was  his 
native  language,  preferred  to  write  in  Latin, — a  most  unusual 
phenomenon.  His  commentaries  on  parts  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  were  ill  composed,  but  contained  valuable 
matter.  In  addition  to  these,  he  wrote  a  book  against  all 
heresies,  besides  others  which  Jerome  does  not  name.  Eouth 
has  preserved  the  fragments  that  are  usually  ascribed  to 
him  in  the  third  volume  of  his  luliquicc  Sacrce,  but  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  tliey  are  really  his. 


CONCLUSION. 

The  reader  who  has  followed  the  criticisms  and  argument  of 
the  foregoing  pages,  will  perhaps  expect  a  few  brief  words 
of  summary  or  retrosj^ect.  It  may  be  also  that  he  will  look 
for  some  explanation  of  what  is  omitted  as  well  as  of  what 
is  included.  I  am  conscious  that  two  highly  important 
sources  of  information  on  the  thought  and  feeling  of  the 
early  Church  have  been  passed  over.  I  have  not  once 
alluded  to  the  e\idence  of  the  Catacombs,  and  hardly  once 
to  those  wonderful  Church  symbols  and  liturgies  which  began 
to  shape  themselves  during  the  period  covered  by  this  book. 

As  regards  the  former,  I  would  not  for  a  moment  under- 
rate the  importance  of  the  epigraphy  and  funeral  art  of 
the  first  Christian  ages.  They  are  not  only  full  of  pro- 
mise as  a  subject  of  research,  but  full  of  human  interest  as 
embodying  a  genuine  popular  sentiment.  But  they  cannot 
be  ranked  as  literature  without  some  straining  of  the  term ; 
and  an  adecpiate  presentation  of  their  results  would  demand 
special  study  and  a  sej^arate  volume. 

The  case  is  different  with  regard  to  the  rise  of  creeds, 
liturgies,  and  formulas.  These  no  doubt  come  strictly 
within  the  province  of  the  literary  historian.  I  have  thought 
it  best,  however,  to  exclude  them :  first,  because  they  could 
only  have  been  presented  in  their  rudimentary  stages,  the 
period  of  their  adult  development  beginning  with  the  Nicene 
Council ;  secondly,  because  from  their  vast  dogmatic  import- 
ance anything  short  of  a  thorough  and  original  treatment 
would  have  been  unsatisfactory. 

Happily  both  these  subjects  are  in  their  main  outlines 
accessiljle    to    the    English    reader.       It    is    otherwise    with 

another  important   branch   of   literature,    viz.,   the   various 

654 


CONCLUSION.  655 

versions  of  the  Bible,  and  especially  of  the  New  Testament. 
A  vast  field  of  investigation  still  lies  open  in  connection  with 
the  fragments  of  the  early  Latin  versions,  and  the  light 
thrown  by  them  upon  the  textual  criticism  of  the  New 
Testament.  The  results  in  this  field,  though  fruitful  and 
encouraging,  are  not  yet  sufficiently  established  to  justify 
a  popular  exposition ;  but  I  could  have  wished,  had  it  been 
in  my  power,  to  have  included  a  chapter  on  this  subject. 

On  the  whole,  I  have  adhered  strictly  to  the  treatment 
sketched  out  in  the  preface,  and  stopped  short  at  the  period 
anterior  to  Arius.  It  would  have  been  tempting  to  notice, 
however  briefly,  the  earlier  works  of  Athanasius;  to  essay 
to  estimate  the  debt  of  Christian  science  to  Eusebius;  to 
consider  how  it  came  to  pass  that  the  conversion  of  an 
emperor,  which  Tertullian  held  to  be  inconceivable,  was 
actually  realised  within  a  century  of  his  death. 

But  in  refusing  to  pass  within  the  borders  of  a  new  epoch, 
I  hope  I  have  gained  the  advantage  of  conveying  clearly  to 
my  readers  the  two  grand  results  of  the  Ante-Nicene  period  : 
first,  the  inter[3retation  put  upon  the  historical  career  of 
Jesus  Christ  by  minds  of  the  first  order,  unbiassed  by  Jewish  vK 
preconceptions;  secondly,  the  gradual  development  of  the 
self-consciousness  of  the  Church  as  a  spiritual  body  diffused 
throughout  the  world,  held  together  by  a  doctrine  and 
practice  traced  back  to  the  Apostles. 

In  their  baldest  statement  these  two  results  are  the  work 
respectively  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  Churches,  and  correspond 
to  the  spheres  of  intellect  and  practice,  of  science  and  law. 

The  first  arose  from  a  synthesis  between  Greek  philosophy 
(mis-called  heathen)  and  the  Gospel;  the  second  from  a 
synthesis  between  Boman  Imperialism  and  the  hierarchy  of 
the  Church. 

The  immense  service  done  by  Greek  Christianity  to 
mankind  is  this,  that  it  discerned  the  need  of  placing  the 
Personality  of  Christ  upon  a  cosmical  basis  ^  before  it  pro- 

^  I  prefer  this  word  to  Universal,  Transcendental,  or  Supra-SIundane, 
because  the  first  two  suggest  an  abstract  sphere  of  thoiipht,  the  last  a 
Deistic  ;  but  I  :ini  awan-  that  the  term  is  not  free  from  ol'jfction. 


656  CONCLUSION. 

ceeded  to  deduce  from  that  Personality  effects  which  reached 
to  the  entire  creation.  It  disengaged  its  Christology  from 
those  Messianic  associations  which,  though  essential  to  its 
truth,  limited  its  universality,  and  required  to  be  transcended 
in  order  to  be  properly  understood.  It  virtually  presents  the 
Person  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  key  to  all  lunnan  Iiistory ;  and 
by  its  analysis  of  that  Person  its  theory  of  human  nature  and 
human  history  stands  or  falls. 

I  need  not  here  enter  into  details.  Tliese  have  been  given 
in  the  course  of  the  book.  But  I  would  venture  to  point  out 
that  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  Christolog}-  of  the  Greek 
Fathers  is  out  of  date,  because  the  metaphysical  terms  which 
embody  it  are  not  congenial  to  our  age.  What  we  want  to 
get  at  is  the  essential  thought  lying  behind  the  imperfect 
vehicle  of  it.  And  if  such  terms  as  Substance,  Person, 
Being,  Matter,  Eternity — even  Incarnation,  Redemption, 
Salvation — require  to  be  re-examined  in  the  light  of  our 
progressive  self-consciousness,  this  is  surely  a  task  worth 
doing,  and  will  prevent  us  from  hastily  discarding  the  only 
philosophic  inteq^retation  of  Christianity  which  has  as  yet 
stood  its  ground.  As  I  have  indicated  more  than  once,  I 
believe  that  our  metaphysical  apparatus  needs  complete 
recasting  in  conformity  with  the  categories  of  inductive 
science  ;  but  the  Person  of  Christ  still  stands  forth  as  the 
central  fact  of  human  history,  and  will  still  require  to  be 
intelligibly  connected  with  the  entire  fabric  of  knowledge. 
No  doubt  our  theology  must  be  expressed  in  terms  of  law. 
and  by  Imu  I  mean  law  in  the  scientific  sense.  And  until 
this  is  clearly  recognised  by  theologians,  the  highest  intellects 
will  refuse  to  accept  its  pronouncements.  The  idea  of  an 
antithesis  between  two  kingdoms,  one  of  Nature,  in  which 
uniformity  reigns,  and  one  of  Grace,  in  wliicli  it  does  not, 
and  the  confinement  of  spiritual  and  religious  truth  to  the 
latter,  was  conceivable  in  the  thirteenth  centur\^  when  stated 
by  an  "  Angelic  Doctor,"  but  is  not  conceivable  in  the  nine- 
teenth, even  though  stated  by  the  "  Angel  from  heaven " 
hiiust'lf.  Greek  theology"  has  many  faults,  many  aberrations, 
many  shortcomings ;  but,   inasmuch  as   it  Imnt'stly  attenqits 


CONCLUSION.  657 

to  connect  our  religious  beliefs  by  an  organic  process  with 
our  scientific  knowledge,  it  can  never  lose  its  significance, 
and  least  of  all  in  the  present  day. 

The  second  net  result  of  the  Ante-Nicene  age  I  have 
called  the  self-consciousness  of  the  Church  as  a  body  ideally 
coextensive  with  the  human  race,  but  actually  limited  by 
agreement  with  the  doctrine  and  fellowship  of  the  Apostles. 
This  is  pre-eminently  the  work  of  the  Latin  thinkers.  It  is 
not  thoroughly  wrought  out  into  a  complete  system  until 
after  the  close  of  the  period  with  which  I  have  dealt.  But 
to  TertuUian  must  be  conceded  the  honour  of  first  presenting 
it  in  a  clear,  forensically  convincing  way.  On  the  incal- 
culable significance  of  this  conception  in  human  history  it  is 
unnecessary  to  dilate.  One  whole  millennium  was  wholly 
engrossed  with  it.  And  even  now,  three  centuries  after 
the  emancipation  of  the  secular  intelligence,  we  should  do 
ill  to  imagine  that  we  are  within  measurable  distance  of  the 
deposition  of  the  Church  from  its  spiritual  throne.  Signs 
are  not  wanting,  which  the  discerning  eye  can  read,  that  a 
vast  development  of  the  hierarchical  principle  is  in  store  for 
mankind.  Only,  if  it  is  to  fulfil  its  divinely-appointed 
mission,  it  must  ally  itself,  not  with  any  particular  or  partial 
embodiment  of  the  apostolic  spirit,  but  with  the  undivided 
and  living  WORD  OF  GOD,  as  rendered  articulate  by  the  con- 
sensus of  intelligent,  truth-seeking  humanity. 

It  may  be  permitted  to  a  humble  learner  at  the  feet  of 
the  Church's  ancient  worthies  to  express  his  hope  and  prayer 
that  the  terrible  mental  unrest  of  the  present  time,  and  the 
successive  disillusionments  of  competing  remedial  agencies 
which  our  age  has  witnessed,  may  ere  long  give  place  to  a 
more  submissive  attitude  to  that  all-loving  yet  irresistible 
Power  above  us,  Who  is  waiting  with  infinite  patience, 
yet  with  infinite  reserve  of  strength,  to  guide  His  wayward 
children,  if  only  they  will  let  themselves  be  guided,  into  the 
haven  of  "rest  in  the  truth." 


2   T 


LIST    OF    AUTllOllS    FKOM    WHOSE    A\  OKKS 
SPECIMEN  PASSAGES  ARE  TRANSLATED. 


AUTHOR. 

8UBJKCT. 

PAGE. 

Clement  of  Rome 

The  Order  of  the  Universe 

38 

Do. 

The  Praise  of  Love 

38.39 

Barnabas 

The  Christian  Covenant 

54 

Do. 

Doctrine  of  the  Sabbath 

55 

Teaching      of      the 
Twelve  Apostles 

(Translated  entire) 

63-71 

Papias 

The  Millennium 

106 

Do. 

The  same 

107 

Do. 

The  Go.spel  of  S.  Mark 

108 

Unknown  Elder 

Against  Marcus  (not  translated) 

no 

The  Clementine  Writer 

The  Ship  of  the  Church 

142 

Do. 

S.  Peter's  Remonstrance  with  Simon 

149 

Apocalvpse  of  Peter 

Vision  of  Paradise 

157 

"Do. 

The  Inferno 

158 

Gospel  of  Peter 

(Translated  entire) 

165-168 

Celsus 

The  Dialogue  of  Jason  and  Papiscus 

295 

Writer  to  Diognetus 

The  Life  of  Christians 

305 

Do. 

Summary  of  Church  Doctrine 

307 

Theophilus 

The  Evidence  of  God's  Existence 

315 

Justin  Martyr 

The  Eucharist 

324,  325 

Do. 

The  Germinal  Word 

333 

Tatian 

Deposit  of  Truth 

340 

Do. 

Sin  not  due  to  Fate 

342 

Hegesippus 

Martyrdom  of  S.  James 

357-359 

Do. 

The  Lord's  Kin.'^men  and  the  Emperor 

359-360 

MeUto 

The  Godhead  of  Christ 

465 

Do. 

The  same 

365,  366 

Polycrates 

The  Paschal  Dispute] 

370 

Irenit'us 

The  Teaching  of  Polycarp 

376 

Do. 

The  Paschal  Dispute 

380 

Do. 

The  Four  Gosi)cls 

386 

Do. 

Eternal  Punishment 

389 

Do. 

Tampering  with  an  Author's  Text 

392 

Do.' 

The  Gallican  Martyrs  (translated  ) 
entire)                                                 \ 

393-403 

Muratorian  Fragment 

S.  John's  Go.'^pel 

407 

Rhodon 

The  Heresy  of  Apelles 

421,422 

►Serapion 

The  Gospel  of  Peter 

422 

ApoUonius 

The  Montanistic  Prophets 

424-426 

658 


LIST  OF  AUTHORS. 


659 


LIST  OF  AVTUOnS— Continued. 


AUTHOR. 

SUBJECT. 

PAGE. 

Origen 

Eschatology 

505,  506 

Gregory 

A  Confession  of  Faith 

519 

Do. 

Origen's  Teaching 

522 

Dionysius  the  Great 

The  Heresy  of  Nepos 

525,  526 

Do. 

The  Apocalypse  of  S.  John 

526-528 

Tertullian 

The  Heresy  of  Marcion 

572 

Do. 

The  Heresy  of  Quintilla 

574 

Do. 

The  Water  of  Baptism 

575 

Do. 

The  Punishment  of  the  Wicked 

581,582 

Do. 

The  Authority  of  Tradition 

583 

Do. 

The  Sin  of  Woman 

586 

Do. 

The  Blessings  of  Marriage 

587 

Do. 

The  Difliculties  of  Mixed  Marriages 

588 

Do. 

Re-marriage 

589 

Do. 

The  Praises  of  Patience 

590 

Cyprian 

The  Eflicacy  of  Baptism 

604 

Do. 

The  Different  Classes  of  Martyrs 

605 

Do. 

The  Supremacy  of  S.  Peter 

607 

Arnobius 

The  Christian's  Cult 

639 

Do. 

Origin  of  the  Soul  (in  the  Latin) 

639  n. 

Commodian 

Anagram  (in  the  Latin) 

650 

INDEX. 


Aberglaube,  as  defined  by  Matthew 
Arnold,  253. 

Abgarus,  correspondence  with  our 
Lord,  154  v.,  1 78. 

Abraham,  Testament  of,  232. 

Abraxas,  206,  294. 

Acacius  of  Cfesarea,  79. 

Achaean  Church,  in  connection  with 
Origen,  474. 

Achanioth,  214. 

Acts  of  Polycarp,  100 ;  of  Ignatius, 
72>  lOl  ;  of  Pilate,  173,  174;  of 
Peter,  17S;  Paul,  ib. ;  Andrew,  ib. ; 
Philip,  ib. ;  Barnabas,  ib. ;  Thomas, 
ib. ;  John,  ib. ;  Thaddeus,  ib. ;  Paul 
and  Thecla,  179;  of  Martyrdom  of 
Justin,  321  ;  of  Cyprian,  bishop  and 
martyr,  611. 

Adam  Kadmon  (Ideal  Man),  134  ; 
appears  in  the  Clementines,  146. 

Adam,  his  fall  denied  by  Ebionites,  146. 

Apocalypse  of,   1 79  ;   Testament 

of,  ib.  ;  Tatian  on  effect  of  his  sin, 
341  ;  importance  of  his  personality 
in  theology,  449. 

Adamantius,  a  second  name  of  Origen, 
464. 

Addai,  doctrine  of,  346. 

Adrumetum,  547. 

Advent  of  Christ  expected,  49,  71,  85. 

yEschylus,  Eumenides  quoted,  316  71. 

African  version  of  the  New  Testament, 
62S. 

Africanus,  Julius,  correspondent  of 
Origen,  477  ;  notice  of  ins  life  and 
works,  514-517. 

Agapd  not  separated  from  the  Eu- 
charist, 61,  372. 

a  Valentinian  iDun,  212. 


Ageratos,  a  Valentinian  ;eon,  212. 

Agnosticism,  18,  253. 

Agrippa  Castor,  294  ;  date,  ib.  ;  an- 
swers Basilides,  199,  204,  294. 

Ainos,  a  Valentinian  reon,  212. 

Akinetos,  a  Valentinian  a'on,  212. 

Alcibiades,  the  Elchasaite,  134. 

Aleatoribus,  de,  Cyprianic  treatise,  127. 

Aletheia,  a  Valentinian  a2on,  212. 

Alexander  Severus,  Roman  Emperor  : 
the  Church  enjoys  rest  under  him, 
615. 

of  Lycopolis,  wrote   against   the 

Manichaeans,  533  n. 

a  Phrygian,  martyred  at  Vienna, 

399- 
a  Montanist  prophet,  423. 

Bishop  of  Jerusalem,   513,   514; 

pupil  of  Clement,  440 ;  fellow-student 
with  Origen,  465  ;  his  life  and  martyr- 

<^<'m,  513.  514. 

Alexandria,  in  connection  with  the 
doctrine  of  the  Logos,  1 1  ;  friendly 
meeting-ground  of  philosophy  and 
Christianity,  263  ;  metropolis  of 
Christian  thought,  429 ;  its  epis- 
copal throne  occupied  by  Origen's 
disciples  for  a  century,  513. 

Alexandrian  school  of  theologv,   429- 

438. 

Alexandrians,  Letter  of  Dionysius  to 
the,  529. 

Allegorical  interpretation  of  Scripture 
allowed  by  Clement,  452  ;  syste- 
matised  by  Origen,  484  avy. ;  liberal 
in  intention  though  not  in  tendency, 
485  ;  advocated  by  Tierius,  531  ; 
combated  by  Methodius.  534. 

Alogi,  a  heretical  sect,  243. 
661 


662 


INDEX. 


Ambrose,  elected  bishop  by  the  voice 

of  the  people,  594. 
Ambrosius    of    Athens,    possibly    the 

author  of  the  Letter  to  Diognetus, 

301,  302. 
the  correspondent  of  Origen,  30 1  ; 

their    friendship,    475  ;    imprisoned 

by  Maxiniin,  476  ;  his  death,  429. 
Ammrmius    Sacas,    founder    of    Neo- 

Platonism,  468;  Origen  attends  his 

lectures,  ib. 
Anastasius,  on  Melito,  364. 
Anaxagoras, persecuted  for  his  opinions, 

265. 
Andrew,  S.,  tradition  of,  405  n. 


Anencletv 


Anacletus,  29,  32  n. 


Angel  of  Repentance,  114;  of  Pleasure, 
of  Punishment,  119  ;  not  necessarily 
a  holy  being,  119  n. ;  of  Justice  and 
Injustice,  116  ;  of  the  Law,  identical 
with  the  Creator,  196. 

Anglican  revival,  significance  of,  545  ; 
Anglican  theory  of  episcopacy  sub- 
stantially that  of  Cyprian,  60S. 

Anicetus,  29  ;  receives  Polycarp,  96  ; 
in  connection  with  Hegesippus,  355. 

Ante-Nicene  Church  literature,  ex- 
clusively theological,  i,  2. 

Anthropos,  a  Valentinian  jcon,  212. 

Antichrist,  49. 

Antinous,  favourite  of  Hadrian,  355. 

Antioch,  in  connection  with  Ignatius, 
72,  74  ;  with  Paul  of  Samosata,  246- 
249;  with  Theophilus,  313;  with 
Clement,  441  n.  ;  with  Origen,  473  ; 
exegetical  school  of,  491  ;  founded 
by  Lucian,  533. 

Antiphanes,  a  comic  poet,  3S5. 

Antitheses  of  Marcion,  239. 

Antium,  refuge  of  Callistus,  412. 

Anthropomorphites,  Melito  classed  with 
them  by  Origen,  364. 

Antoninus  Pius,  Roman  Emperor,  292  ; 
addressed  by  Justin,  323. 

Antonius  Morcos,  a  Catholic  Copt,  347. 

Anubion,  a  Syrian  rhetorician,  141. 

Apelles,  a  disciple  of  Marcion,  239  ;  his 
relations  with  Rhodon,  421. 

Aphraates,  a  Persian  bishop,  346. 

Apion,  a  grammarian,  141. 

Apocalypse,  the,  known  to  Justin,  337  ; 


criticism  of,  by  Dionysius,  484,  526- 
528 ;  his  view  as  to  its  authorship, 

527- 
Apocalypse,    of    Peter,    155-159;     of 

Thomas,   160 ;    of   Stephen,    ib.  ;  of 

Paul,  a  post-Nicene  production,  ib, ; 

of  Moses,  179  ;  of  Adam,  ib. 
Apocrypha,  omitted  from  the  canon  of 

SS.,  by  Melito,  363. 
Apocryphal  literature  in  Church,  151- 

180.      See  also  under   Gospels  and 

Acts. 
Apollinaris    Claudius,     95,     367 ;     an 

authority     for     the     story    of     the 

Thundering  Legion,  367. 
of  Laodicea,  353  ;  reputed  author 

of  an  anti-Montanist  work,  421. 
Apollonides,    a    Monarchian    teacher. 

244  n. 
Apollonius,  an  anti-Montanist,  422. 

a  Roman  senator,  419  n. 

of  Tyana,  501. 

Apologetic  literature,  257-276. 

method  of  Clement,  457,  45S  ;  of 

Origen,  498-502. 

Apologists,  different  classificatiims  of, 
277.  287. 

Apology  of  Aristides,  291  ;  of  Quad- 
ratu.s,  292  ;  of  Athenagoras,  299  ;  of 
Justin  (first  and  second),  323-328  ; 
of  Melito,  363  ;  of  Claudius  Ap<^lli- 
naris,  367  ;  of  Miltiades,  36S  ;  of 
Apollonius,  419  V.  ;  of  Tertullian, 
561  -  563 ;     peroration     translated, 

564,  565. 
Apostles,  order  of,  61,  68,  S3. 

twelve,   ecclesiastical   canons   of 

the,  51. 

teachings  of  the,  57. 

second  ordinances  of  the,  57. 

memoirs  of  the,  325,  336. 

Apostolic  tradition,  unbroken  contin- 
uity of,  3S5  ;  practice  occasionally 
changed,  371,  372. 

Fathers,  8,  21-27. 

Apo.stolical  churches,  357. 

ordinanc»'s,  175. 

succession,  453,  544. 

Apuleius,  reconciled  popular  religion 
with  philosophy,  266 ;  a  native  of 
Madaura,  547. 


INDEX. 


663 


Aquila,  translator  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, 473. 

Aquinas  shows  some  traces  of  Origen, 
507  ;  his  theory  of  the  kingdoms  of 
nature  and  grace,  545. 

Arabia,  in  connection  with  Pantajnus, 
433  ;  with  Origen,  473,  477. 

Aramaean  Gospel  of  Matthew,  in  use 
in  India   in  the  time  of  Panttcnus, 

433- 

Arcadia,  1 14. 

Archaeological  mission  at  Cairo,  155. 

Archelaus,  an  author  against  the 
Manich;i2ans,  533. 

Archon,  Great,  of  Basilides,  201. 

Arianising  tendency  observable  in 
Amobius,  633. 

Arians  claimed  Origen  on  their  side, 
494. 

Aristides,  an  Athenian,  2S8  ;  how  his 
Apology  was  recovered,  289,  290  ; 
probably  imitated  by  Justin,  291  ; 
date  of  his  work,  292. 

Aristion,  94. 

Aristo  of  Pella,  294,  295  ;  author  of 
the  Dialogue  between  Jason  and 
Papiscus,  ib. 

Aristotle,  his  influence  on  Basilides, 
204  n.  ;  on  Marcion,  241  ;  compared 
with  Origen,  473,  476,  491. 

Aries,  Council  of,  in  connection  with 
heretical  baptism,  603. 

Armenian  monks  of  Venice,  289 ; 
first  issued  the  Apology  of  Aristides, 
ib.  ;  a  version  of  Ephrajm's  Com- 
mentary on  Tatian  in  the  Armenian 
langiiage,  347. 

Arnobius,  630-641 ;  biassed  by  Gnostic 
prejudices,  2S2,  640;  a  rhetorician 
by  profession,  631  ;  circumstances 
of  his  conversion,  ib.  ;  shows  little, 
if  any,  knowledge  of  the  Scriptun-s, 
632  ;  refutation  of  Paganism,  633 
sqq.  ;  scientific  cast  of  his  mind, 
634,  635  ;  general  estimate,  640,  642. 

Artemon,  a  Monarchian  teacher,  244. 

Ascents  of  James,  134  ;  Ascent  of  Paul, 
160. 

Asceticism,  a  necessary  corollary  from 
dualism,  iS;  taught  by  Marcion, 
238. 


Asclepiades,  a  Monarch  ian  heretic, 
244  «. 

a  friend  of  Lactantius,  646. 

Athanasius,  quotes  Ignatius,  73  ;  grasps 
the  significance  of  the  Incarnation, 
280  ;  compared  with  Origen,  462  ; 
vindicates  Origen's  orthodoxy,  ib.  ; 
his  clear  enunciation  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  494  ;  defended  Origen, 
Dionysius,  and  Theognostus,  531. 

Atheism,  Christianity  popularly  viewed 
as,  269. 

Athenagoras,  296-300 ;  connected  by 
tradition  with  the  Alexandrian 
school,  279,  298  ;  Apology  addressed 
to  Antoninus  and  Commodus,  ib.  ; 
theology  resembles  that  of  Justin, 
299  ;  not  a  Montanist,  ib.  ;  work  on 
the  Resurrection,  ib. 

Athenian  character,  297. 

Athenodorus,  brother  of  Gregory  Thau- 
maturgus,  517. 

Athens,  church  of,  29S ;  Epistle  of 
Dionysius  to,  309  ;  Origen  resides 
there,  477. 

Atonement,  doctrine  of,  not  thoroughly 
appreciated  by  Clement,  455. 

Attains,  a  Pergamene  Christian,  394. 

Augustine,  S.,  refutes  old  objections  to 
Christianity,  270  ;  vindicates  God's 
sovereignty,  282;  compared  with 
Origen,  462  ;  his  preponderant  in- 
fluence on  theology,  542  ;  couples 
Carthage  with  Rome  as  a  seat  of 
letters,  546 ;  his  profound  know- 
ledge of  the  human  heart,  595  ; 
a  quotation  from  his  Confessions, 
620  n. 

Aurelian,  Roman  Emperor,  intervenes 
in  the  dispute  about  Paul  of  Samo- 
sata,  249. 

Aurelius,  M.,  17  ;  a  persecutor  of 
Christianity,  273. 

Autolycus   the   friend    of   Theophilus, 

z^z^  314- 

Autophyes,  a  Valentinian  teon,  212. 
Avircius    Marc»?llus,     reputed    author 

of  a  work  against   the   Montanists, 

420. 
Axiomatic  truths  iniplanli-d  in   man's 

reason,  50S. 


664 


INDEX. 


Bacchus,  grandfather  of  Justin,  317. 

Bacon,  Lord,  on  the  value  of  the  argu- 
ment from  antiquity,  620  n. 

Baptism,  rules  for,  66  ;  Essene  perver- 
sion of,  133  ;  not  alluded  to  by 
Tatian,  339  ;  Tertullian's  treatise  on, 
574 ;  clinical  form  of  it,  625  n.  ; 
sin  after,  1 15;  heretical,  249;  how 
far  valid,  575  ;  Cyprian's  argument 
on  the  subject,  600-603  ;  view  of 
►Stephen  of  Rome,  602  ;  decision  of 
the  Western  Church  at  Aries,  603. 

Bar  -  cabbas,  Bar  -  coph,  prophets  of 
Basilides,  204,  294. 

Barcochba,  i-evolt  of,  294. 

Bardaisan,  22S-230. 

Barlauni  and  Joasaph,  history  of,  290. 

Barnabas  the  Apostle,  28. 

Epistle  of,  23,  45-56;  misunder- 
stands S.  Paul,  24  ;  at  variance  with 
Church  tradition,  56  n. ;  its  relation 
to  the  Didache,  58,  59  n.;  its  re- 
semblances    with    Justin's    theory, 

329- 

Barsalibi,  an  Armenian  bishop,  346. 

Basil,  S.,  joint  compiler  with  Gregory 
of  the  Philocalia,  509  n. 

Basilideans  not  genuine  followers  of 
Basilides,  206. 

Basilides,  199-207  ;  Gospel  according 
to,  169,  199  ;  his  grandiloquent  pro- 
phetic authorities,  294  ;  mentioned 
by  Ilippolytus,  413. 

Basilides,  an  Egyptian  bishop,  corre- 
spondent of  Dionysius  the  Great, 
52471. 

liassus,  a  Nicomedian  heretic,  477. 

Baudouinus,  a  commentator  on  the 
Octavius,  616  ;  first  discoverer  of  its 
true  author,  623. 

Baur's  theory  of  Hernias' Christology, 
118;  of  Hegesippus*  Ebionism,  356. 

Benedict  XIV.,  his  criticism  on  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria,  461. 

Beryllus,  an  Arabian  bishop,  his  views 
combated  by  Origen,  245,  477. 

Ber^tus,  in  Syria,  517  ;  in  connection 
with  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  ib. 

Biblias,  a  martyr  of  Vienne,  396. 

Biblical  criticism,  foundations  laid  by 
Origen,  473,  483  ;  greatly  furthered 


by  Africanus,  516;  by  Dionysius, 
528. 

Bigg's  Christian  Platonists  of  Alex- 
andria, referred  to,  450,  455. 

Birks,  Professor,  on  the  writer  to 
Diognetus,  301,  302. 

Bishop,  the,  as  a  type  of  union,  accord- 
ing to  Ignatius,  87  ;  to  Cyprian,  608. 

Blandina,  a  martyr,  395  377. 

Bostra,  in  Arabia,  245,  477. 

Boswell  and  Johnson  compared  with 
Ambrosius  and  Origen,  478. 

Bryennios,  36,  51,  57. 

Buddha,  290  n. 

Bunsen  dcmbts  genuineness  of  a  portion 
of  Polycarp's  epistle,  98. 

Butler,  Bishop,  indebted  to  Origen  for 
the  text  on  which  his  Analogy  is 
founded,  509 ;  makes  use  of  the 
argument  from  human  ignorance, 
638  ;  Sermon  on  Resentment,  645. 

Bythius,  a  Valentinian  a?on,  212. 

Bythos,  name  of  the  Supreme  God  in 
Valentinus'  system,  211. 

Byzantium,  Theodotus  of,  243. 

CiECiLius,  an  interlocutor  in  Minucius 
Felix's  Dialogue,  499,  615  ;  perhaps 
the  same  as  C.  Natalis,  magistrate  of 
Cirta,  623. 

Caecilius  (or  perhaps  Cixjcilianus),  name 
of  the  person  to  whom  Cyprian  owed 
his  conversion  to  the  faith,  593  ; 
adopted  by  Cyprian,  ib. 

Caesarea,  meeting-place  of  Clement 
and  S.  Peter,  138  ;  Zaccheus,  the  first 
bishop,  139  ;  refuge  of  Origen  during 
Caracalla's  persecution,  471. 

Ca3sarism,  2. 

Cainites,  the,  227  ;  referred  to  by  Ter- 
tullian  as  depreciating  baptism,  574. 

Caius,  the  Roman  presbyter,  418,  419. 

Callistus,  Pope,  134;  influenced  by 
Artemon's  heresy,  245  ;  his  relations 
with  S.  Hippolytus,  411,  412;  his 
power  over  the  Roman  communion, 
411. 

Canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  by  Melito, 

363- 

of  New  Testament,  not  alluded  to 

in  the  Didach^,  61  ;  not  formed  in 


INDEX. 


665 


the  time  of  Ignatius,  84  ;  hardly  so 
in  Origen's  day,  505. 

Canons  of  reconciliation,  issued  by 
Peter  of  Alexandria,  531. 

Canonical  Epistle  of  Gregory  Thauma- 
turgus,  520. 

Caracalla,  persecutes  the  Christians, 
471,  513;  allows  the  Church  a  period 
of  rest,  615. 

Carchor  in  Mesopotamia,  seat  of  the 
bishopric  of  Archelaus,  533. 

Carpocrates,  225,  226,  413  n. ;  the  first 
to  assume  the  name  of  Gnostic,  225. 

Carpocratians,  226. 

Carthage,  residence  of  Hermogenes, 
240  ;  sktrtch  of  the  city  and  church 
of,  546-548,  556  ;  her  betjuest  to 
Latin  Christianity,  547,  54S. 

Cataphrygians,  421. 

Catechesis,  system  of.  429,  430. 

Catechetical  school  of  Alexandria,  430- 
436. 

Catherine,  S.,  convent  of,  2S9. 

Catholic  Church,  91. 

Catholic  Epistles  of  Dionysius,  309. 

Celsus,  the  translator  of  "Jason  and 
Papiscus,"  295. 

the    antagonist    of    Christianity, 

263  ;  does  not  allude  to  the  slan- 
derous charges  against  Christianity, 
270 ;  ridicules  the  arguments  of 
Aristides,  291  ;  depreciates  Aristo 
of  Pella,  295  ;  his  treatise  against 
Christianity,  478,  498,  499  ;  his  mis- 
givings as  to  the  future  of  Paganism, 
501. 

Cerdo,  a  Gnostic,  233  ;  teacher  of 
Marcion,  234. 

Cerinthus,  1 95- 1 97  ;  by  some  regarded 
as  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
and  Apocalypse,  197  ;  his  Docetism, 
197  ;  said  by  Hippolytus  to  be  in- 
fected with  Egyptian  ideas,  413  71. 

Cesti  of  Julius  Africanus,  I  n.,  515. 

Charis,  a  Valentinian  icon,  212. 

Chiliasm  of  Papias,  106,  107 ;  disal- 
lowed by  the  Clementine  writer,  146  ; 
of  Cerinthus,  196  ;  of  Hippolytus, 
417  ;  repugnant  to  tiie  principles  of 
the  Alexandrian  school,  453,  454  ; 
upheld  by  Nepos  and  his  school,  525. 


Chiliastic  views  of  Papias,  107  ;  of 
Cerinthus,  196;  of  Irenseus,  387; 
of  Hippolytus,  415,  417. 

Christ,  pre-existence  of,  197  ;  one  of 
the  aeons,  according  to  Valentinus. 
216  ;  Justin  defends  the  worship  of, 
323  ;  He  gives  solidarity  to  man- 
kind, 449. 

Christ's  revelation  to  mankind,  per- 
manence of  its  essential  elements  in 
human  history,  7,  8. 

Christian  writers  as  a  rule  superior  to 
their  heathen  contemporaries,  5. 

civilisation,  13,  14. 

Christianity  a  Greek  religion,  12  ; 
founded  on  the  Messiahship  of  Christ, 
131  ;  reposes  on  fact,  not  on  theory, 
184;  attitude  of  the  Jews  towards 
it,  257-260 ;  of  the  philosopljers, 
260-264 ;  of  the  Pagan  religious 
systems,  264-270  ;  of  the  imperial 
power,  270-276  ;  represented  as  a 
new  Law,  450. 

Christians  condemned  for  the  name 
alone,  276,  323  ;  the  soul  of  the 
world,  305,  306  ;  divided  into  car- 
nal and  spiritual,  449. 

Christology,  of  Clement,  34  ;  of  pseudo- 
Clement,  42  ;  of  Larnabas,  50  ;  of 
Hernias,  118,  1 19;  of  Valentinus, 
218,  219  ;  of  the  Ophite  sects,  224  ; 
of  Marcion,  237  ;  of  Beryllus,  245  ; 
of  Paul  of  SauKjsata,  247  ;  of  Praxeas, 

250  ;  of  Noetus,   250  ;  of  Sabellius, 

251  ;  of  the  writer  to  Diognetus, 
304  ;  of  S.  Justin,  329,  330  ;  of  S. 
Hippolytus,  417,  418  ;  of  Origen, 
496  sqq.;  of  Gregory,  519  ;  of  Minu- 
cius  Felix,  623  ;  of  Novatian,  627  ; 
of  Arnobius,  633,  63S  ;  of  Lactan- 
tius,  649,  650. 

Chnmicon  of  Eusebius,  293. 
Chronological  discjuisitions,  in  the  Pat- 
ristic period,  515. 
Chrysophora,  Epistle  of  Dionysius  to, 

3"- 

Chrysostom,  S.,  con)partd  with  Origen, 

462. 
Church,  visible  and  invisible,  504, 
unity  of,  at  first  mainly  spiritual, 

9,   10;    its  catholicity.  Si  ;    likened 


666 


INDEX. 


to  a  tower  all  but  completed,  by 
Hennas,  121  ;  effects  of  Gnos- 
ticism on,  192,  193  ;  not  alluded  to 
by  Tatian,  339. 

Church,  different  conceptions  of,  449  ; 
Clement's  theory  of,  453,  454  ;  autho- 
rity of,  as  regards  Scripture,  452  ; 
conception  of  its  nature  (i)  in  Greek 
(2)  in  Latin  Christianity,  539,  540; 
in  Cyprian,  542  ;  he  compares  it  to 
the  ark  of  Noah,  544. 

literature,  three  periods  of,  7. 

Cicero,  imitated  by  Minucius,  616  ;  by 
Novatian,  627  ;  alluded  to  by  Ar- 
nobius,  640  ;  the  literary  model  of 
Lactantius,  645. 

Circumcision,  insisted  on  byEbionites, 
131  ;  by  Cerinthians,  196;  by  the 
Judaisers  generally,  258. 

Church  of  the,  131. 

Cirta,  birthplace  of  Fronto,  547. 

Cities,  ancient  life  centred  in,  16. 

City  of  God,  S.  Augustine's,  507,  544. 

Cleanthes,  prayer  of,  435  n. 

Clemens  Flavius,  condemned  by  Do- 
mitian,  30,  31. 

Clement  of  Rome,  28-39  ;  his  relation 
to  the  Apostles,  30-33  ;  date  and 
nationality,  29-31  ;  reception  of  his 
epistle  in  the  Church,  36,  37  ;  ex- 
tracts, 38,  39  ;  his  epistle  read  in 
Corinth  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century,  31 1  ;  features  of  his  bio- 
graphy borrowed  from  his  Alex- 
andrian namesake,  439. 

martyrdom  of  Saint,  136. 

ordinances  of,  51. 

Pseudo-,  40-44  ;    Second  Epistle 

to  Corinthians,  40  ;  Epistles  on 
Virginity,  43  ;  P'pistles  to  James, 
44. 

of  Alexandria,  439-46 1 ;  quotes  the 

Didache,  57  ;  free  from  party  spirit, 
430  ;  most  original  of  the  Fathers, 
439  >  his  life,  439-441  ;  his  literary 
qualities,  441-443  ;  his  theological 
principles,  445-456 ;  his  canonisa- 
tion, 461. 

notices  of  Basilides,  199,  200. 

poems  attributed  to  him,  460. 

VIII.   erases   the   name   of  Cle- 


ment of  Alexandria  from  the  list 
of  saints,  461. 

Clementine  literature,  136-150;  Ana- 
lysis of  Recognitions,  137-142  ;  of 
Epistle  to  James,  142  ;  of  Epitome, 
143,  144  ;  indebted  to  Gnosticism, 
145;  a  tendency-writing,  145;  Ho- 
milies more  heretical  than  Recog- 
nitions, 149  ;  date  and  local  origin, 
150;  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament, 
145. 

Cletus,  29. 

Clopas,  father  of  Simeon,  360, 

Clubs,  not  permitted  by  the  State,  274  ; 
severe  laws  against,  563. 

Codex  Alexandrinus,  36 ;  omits  the 
Shepherd,  126. 

Constantinopolitanus,  51. 

Sinaiticus,   46,  51  ;  includes  the 

Shepherd,  126. 

Claromontanus,  127. 

Fuldensis,  347. 

Colarbasus,  a  heretic,  413. 

Commodian,  651,  652  ;  specimen  of 
his  sacred  acrostics,  652. 

Commodus,  Roman  Emperor,  240 ; 
associated  with  M.  Aurelius  in  the 
Empire,  363,  419. 

Conciliatory  writings,  131,  145. 

Confessors,  African,  over-praised  by 
Cyprian,  599  ;  their  imprudent  con- 
duct, 603. 

Constantine  appoints  Lactantius  tutor 
to  Crispus,  644. 

Consubstantialityof  the  Son, 49371., 494. 

Coracion,  a  Millenarian  teacher,  526. 

Cornelius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  letter  of 
Dionysius  to,  524  n.  ;  circumstances 
of  his  election,  625. 

the  centurion,  141. 

Cornutus,  the  Stoic  philosopher,  547. 

Council  of  Antioch,  248  ;  of  Nicaja 
(19th  Canon),  249 ;  of  Jerusalem,  520. 

Countries,  Book  of  the  Laws  of,  228. 

Creation,  Greek  idea  of,  1 1  ;  to  last 
6000  years,  55  ;  Gnostic  theory  of, 
189  ;  theory  of  Hermogenes,  241  ; 
theory  of  Theophilus,  314  ;  Origen's 
theory,  494. 

Creationist  theory  of  the  origin  of  the 
soul,  645. 


INDEX 


667 


Creed,  earliest  form  of,  291. 

Crescens,  a  C^'nic  philusopher,  263, 
320,  327. 

Crispus,  eldest  son  of  Constantine,  644. 

Cross,  types  of,  in  Old  Testament, 
260  ;  prefigured  in  the  celestial 
sphere,  218. 

Cureton's     theory     of     the     Ignatian 
Epistles,  79  ;  his  Spicilegium  Syria-    • 
cum,  230,  301. 

Cynics,  18S. 

Cyprian,  S.,  593-612  ;  his  account  of 
his  baptism,  339  ;  ct)mpared  with 
Dionysius  of  Ah-xandria,  529,  530  ; 
treatise  on  prayer,  imitated  from 
Tertullian's,  57S  ;  borrows  from 
Tcrtullian  arguments  against  the 
Jews,  569  ;  born  in  a  good  position, 
593  ;  elected  bishop  by  the  popular 
voice,  594  ;  leading  features  of  his 
character,  594-597  ;  compared  with 
Tertullian,  596  ;  withdrew  during 
the  persecution,  ib.  ;  his  treatment 
of  the  lapsed,  597  ;  his  freedom  from 
jealousy,  59S  ;  a  true  statesman,  599  ; 
criticism  of  his  writings,  604-609  ; 
metropolitan  of  all  Africa,  609  ; 
greatness  of  his  administration,  611  ; 
clearness  of  his  expositions,  611  ; 
martyrdom  and  canonisation,  612, 

Cyrenaics,  18S. 

Cyrrhus,  Theodoret's  see,  345. 

Daille,  views  on  Episcopacy,  81  ; 
theory  of  interpolation  of  Polycarp's 
P^pistle,  98  71. 

Dale,  referred  to,  315. 

Daniel,   interpretation   of    his    predic-    ' 
tions   by    Barnabas,   49 ;    by   Julius    ' 
Africanus,    515  ;     criticism    of    his 
prophetic  gift  by  the  same,  517.  ' 

Decay  of  the  world,  generally  believed 
by   both    heathens    and    Christians, 

634,  636  n.  ;    reasons  explaining   it, 

635.  636. 

Decian  persecution  at  Carthage,  wide- 
spread defection  of  the  Church  under 

it,  597. 
Decius,   Roman    Emperor,    persecutes 

Christianity,  479,  597, 
Deistic  tendency  of  later  Judaism,  242  ; 


of  thu  Unitarians  or  Monarchians, 
243  ;  of  Paul  of  Samosata,  247. 

Demetrianus,  one  of  Cyprian's  corre- 
spondents, 609  ;  a  correspondent  of 
Lactantius,  645. 

Demetrius,  Bishtjp  of  Alexandria,  466  ; 
appoints  Origen  to  the  Catechetical 
Chair,  ib.  ;  is  offended  with  Origen's 
conduct,  472  ;  orders  his  departure 
from  Alexandria,  475  ;  deposes  him 
from  the  priesthood,  ib. 

Demiurge,  the,  189,  214,  215. 

Demons,  doctrine  of,  267  ;  Tatian's 
theory  of,  341  ;  Arnobius'  theory, 
640. 

Demonstratio  Evangelica,  a  work  of 
Eusebius,  515. 

Design,  the  argument  from,  620. 

Despondency,  widespread  in  the  third 
century,  610. 

Devil,  salvability  of  the,  510. 

Diatessaron  of  Tatian,  2S8  ;  its  dis- 
covery in  modern  times,  344-348  ; 
summary  of,  349-351  ;  suppressed 
by  Theodoret,  345. 

Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography,  re- 
ferred to,  337,  482. 

Didache,  59-71  ;  important  authority 
on  liturgical  and  ritual  questions,  324. 

Didymus,  a  correspondent  of  Dionysius, 
524  n. 

Diocletian,  Roman  Emperor,  Pamphilus 
martyred  under,  532  ;  appoints  Lac- 
tantius professor  of  rhetoric  at  Xico- 
media,  643. 

Diogenes  the  Cynic,  234. 

Diognetus,  writer  to,  300-30S  ;  tutor 
to  the  young  Aurelius,  301  ;  tone 
of  mind  differs  from  that  of  Justin, 
302  ;  his  theology,  304  ;  disparages 
Judaism,  28 1  n.  ;  extracts,  305-309  ; 
wrongly  charged  with  Gnosticism, 
308 ;  his  idealistic  theory  of  the 
Church,  540. 

Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  reputed 
author  of  the  Celestial  and  Terrestrial 
Hierarchy,  294. 

of    Corinth,    on    the    Epistle    of 

Clement,  32  11.  ;  on  C^uadratus,  293  ; 
list  of  his  works,  309-312  ;  liberal 
views  on  Church  discipline,  309,  310. 


668 


INDEX. 


Dionysius  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Alex- 
andria, 523-528  ;  his  critical  sagacity, 
4S4  ;  succeeds  Heraclas  as  head  of  the 
Catechetical  school,  523  ;  his  char- 
acter, ib.  ;  his  controversial  method, 
525  ;  his  criticism  of  the  Apocalypse, 
526-52S  ;    compared  with    Cyprian, 

529,  530- 

Bishop     of     Rome,     corresponds 

with  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  524  n., 

529. 
Ditheism,    Hippolytus    charged    with, 

245,  416. 
Divus,  title  given  to  Roman  Emperors 

after  death,  622  n. 
Docetae,  sect  of  Julius  Cassianus,  197  ; 

mentioned  by  Serapion,  421. 
Docetic  heresy,  earlie.-t  form,  85,  89, 

197  ;  later  form,  198. 
Docetism  of  Valentinus,  218. 
Doctrina  Apostolorum,  59  n. 
Dogmatic  system  of  Church  not  fully 

developed  in  Origen's  time,  463. 
Domitian,  persecution  by,  30  ;  in  con- 

necticm  with  S.  John's  Apocalypse, 

102  ;  he  summons  the  grandsons  of 

Judas  to  Rome,  359. 
Domitius,  a  correspondent  of    Diony- 
sius, 524  n. 
Donaldson  on  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas, 

122  ;  on  Athenagoras,  300. 
Donatus,  a  friend  of  Cyprian,  604. 
the  African  bishop  and  confessor, 

a  friend  of  Lactantius,  644  n. 
Dorner,  on  Hermas'  Christology,  118. 
Dositheus,  195. 
Dualism,  17  ;  of  Marcion,  236. 


Ebiomsm,  1 31-135  ;  origin  of  the 
name,  132,  133  n.  ;  two  types  of 
the  doctrine,  132  ;  connection  with 
Kssenism,  133  ;  influence  on  the 
Church,  134,  135  ;  opposed  by 
Justin,  329  ;  said  to  be  infected 
with  Egyptian  ideas,  413. 

Ecclesia,  in  Valentinus'  system,  41  n.  ; 
the  invisible  archetype  of  the  earthly 
church,  113  ;  one  of  the  Valentinian 
seons,  212. 

Ecclesiastes,   Metaphrase   of   Gregory, 


I        520  ;  conwnentary  on,  by  Dionysius 
I        of  Alexandria,  524  n. 

Ecclesiasticos,  a  Valentinian  reon,  212. 

Edessa,  Church  of,  37,  154  n.  ;  in  con- 
I  nection  with  Bardesanes,  228  ; 
I  Tatian  died  there,  348. 
1  Education  of  human  race  by  Christ, 
j  457  ;  Origen's  scheme  of  Christian 
education,  469,  470. 

Egnatius,  76. 

Egyptian  mind,  tendency  of,  429 ; 
apparent  in  Origen,  481. 

Egyptians,  Gospel  according  to,  42, 
163. 

Elagabalus,  228,  514. 

Elchasai,  Book  of,  133. 

Elchasaites,  1 33-135,  413. 

Eldad,  Book  of,  used  by  Hermas,  123  71. 

Elders,  a  name  given  to  the  Apostlea, 
105  ;  hearers  of  Apostles,  1 10. 

Eleutherus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  29,  249  ; 
in  connection  with  Hegesippus,  354. 

Elpis,  a  Valentinian  reon,  212. 

Emanation,  Gnostic  theory  of,  211. 

Emmaus,  supposed  to  have  been  the 
episcopal  see  of  Africanus,  514. 

Empire,  spiritual  condition  of  the,  2,  3. 

Encratism,  a  tendency  in  the  early 
church,  343. 

Encratite  views  of  Pseudo-Clement, 
42;  of  Essenes,  134  ;  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  the  Egyptians,  163  ;  of 
Leucius,  176;  of  Julius  Cassianus, 
231  ;  Musianus  writes  against  them, 
312  ;  favoured  by  Tatian,  344  ; 
opposed  by  Apollinaris  and  Modes- 
tus,  367,  368. 

Ennoia,  a  Valentinian  aeon,  212. 

Enoch,  Book  of,  155. 

Enthymesis,  a  Valentinian  ;oon,  214  ; 
criticism  of  Irenneus  upon  it,  3S5. 

Ephesus,  the  second  cradle  of  the 
Church,  93  ;  Justin  retired  there, 
320 ;  wrote  liis  Dialogue  there,  322. 

Ephraem  (Syrus),  229,  346  ;  his  com- 
mentary   on    Tatian's    Diatessaron, 

347- 
Epictetus   (juoted   in    connection   with 

Arnobius,  63S. 
Epiphanes,  a  Gnostic  teacher,  226. 
Epiphaniua  on  the  Roman  succession, 


INDEX. 


669 


29  ;  on  Clement's  Epistles,  43  ;  pre- 
serves extracts  fron)  Methodius' 
treatise  un  the  Resurrection,  534. 

Episcopacy,  61,  70  ;  in  Ignatian  letters, 
85-87 ;  fully  established  in  the  time 
of  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  31 1. 

Episcopate,  Cyprian's  theory  of  the, 
544  ;  again  stated,  604,  605. 

Eschatological  views  of  Origen,  505, 
506. 

Eschatology,  61,  71. 

Esoteric  teaching  of  Clement,  450,  457- 

Essenes,  a  Jewish  sect,  413  ;  their  in- 
fluence on  the  development  of  Ebion- 
ism,  133. 

Eternal  generation  of  the  Son,  494. 

punishment,  according  to  Origen, 

510,  511.     Cf.  Punishment. 

Eucharist,  in  the  Didachd,  67,  68  ;  in 
the  Letter  to  Diognetus,  309  ;  in 
Justin's  Apology,  324,  325  ;  reserva- 
tion of,  324. 

I'uphrates,  an  Ophite  teacher,  225. 

Eusebius  of  Ciesarea,  accepts  the  Epistle 
of  Barnabas,  46  ;  his  views  on  the 
Ignatian  Epistles,  77  ;  accepts  the 
Epistle  of  Polycarp,  100 ;  mentions 
the  apocryphal  works  ascribed  to 
S.  Peter,  156  ;  mentions  Tatian's 
Harmony,  but  probably  had  not  read 
it,  345  ;  freely  used  the  chronological 
researches  of  Africanus,  515  ;  wrote 
against  Porphyry,  534  ;  mentions 
TertuUian's  proficiency  in  Roman 
law,  549. 
Evans's  Theological  Biography  referred 

to,  624. 
Evidences  of  Christianity,  282-284  ;  of 
the  truth  of  Scriptun;,  451;  of  the 
Gospel,   as   enumerated    by    Origen, 
502. 
Evil,  origin  of,  17,  186-188,  196  ;  Stoic 
conceptions    of,    434,   435  ;    intense 
consciousness  of  it  in  Plato,  447  n. 
Evolution,  the  great  key  to  Nature,  509. 
Exegesis  of  Scripture,  by  Barnabas,  53  ; 
by   Valentinus,    217,    2iS  ;    by    the 
school  of  Antioch,  313  ;  the  three- 
fold sense  as  laid  down  by  Clement, 
452  ;  principles  of  Origen's  exegesis, 
482  ;  summarised,  490 ;  exegesis  of 


TertuUian,  56S  ;  he  depreciates  alle- 
gorical exegesis,  576. 

Exegetica,  of  Julius  Cassianus,  197  ;  of 
Basilides,  199. 

Extempore  prayer,  61. 

Parian,  Bishop  of  Kome,  624  ;  ordains 
Novatian,  625  ;  martyred  under 
Decius,  624. 

Fabius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  corresponds 
with  Dionysius   the    Great,   524  /(., 

529. 
I   Faith,    relation    to    knowledge,    1S3  ; 
position  of,  in  Clement's  system,  450, 

455- 

Fasting,  TertuUian's  treatise  on,  591. 

Fathers,  the  value  of  their  writings, 
14-16  ;  not  as  a  rule  popular  writers, 
151. 

Final  cause  of  the  universe,  not  man, 
640. 

Firmianus,  a  name  of  Lactantius,  643. 

Firmilian  of  Cappadocia,  24S  ;  offers 
Origen  a  refuge,  477  ;  devoted  to  his 
memory,  513. 

Firmium,  a  town  in  Italy,  643. 

Firmus,  a  town  in  Numidia,  643. 

Flavia  Neapolis,  birthplace  of  Justin, 
318. 

Franciscus  Torrensis,  a  Jesuit  com- 
mentator on  Gregory,  518  n. 

Frederick,  Emperor  of  Germany,  447. 

Freedom  of  will  denied  by  Gnostics, 
by  Stoics,  434,  435  ;  strongly  affirmed 
by  Clement,  449  ;  made  the  pivot  of 
Origen's  system,  492,  494,  495,  503. 

French  Republic,  its  attitude  towards 
Christianity,  270  n. 

Fron  to,  tutor  of  M.  Aureliu-,  547  ; 
referred  to  in  the  Octavius,  615. 

Fuller  in  some  respects  may  be  com- 
pared with  Clement,  441. 

Galkkius,  Roman  Emperor,  issues  an 
edict  of  toleration  (a.d.  311),  644  71. 

Maximus,    prefect   of   Africa   in 

Cyprian's  time,  61 2. 

Gallandi's  Bibliotheca  Veterum  Pat- 
rum,  524  n. 

GalHcan  Church,  Letter  of  the,  391-401. 

General  Councils,  their  suitability  for 


670 


INDEX. 


li  church  covirt  of  appeal  understood 
by  Cyprian,  606,  608. 

Germauu.s  accused  Dionysius  the  Great 
of  avoidinij  martyrdom,  52471.,  529. 

Gibbon's  remark  about  the  popular  re- 
ligions beinj,'  all  held  to  be  true,  266. 

Gitteh,  birthplace  of  Simon  Magus,  194. 

Glaucias,  supposed  teacher  of  Basilides, 
199. 

Gnosis,  50 ;  the  true,  according  to 
Irentcus,  3S6. 

Gnostic,  the  orthodox,  according  to 
Clement,  448. 

(jnosticism,  iSi-193;  in  a  sense  an- 
terior to  Christianity,  183  n. ;  its 
effects  on  the  thought  of  the  Church, 
189,  190;  not  yet  extinct,  253  ;  con- 
demned by  Justin,  332  ;  by  Hippo- 
lytus,  413  ;  some  traces  of  it  remain 
in  Arnobius,  640. 

Gnostics,  their  relation  to  Paganism, 
10  ;  denial  of  the  Resurrection,  41  ; 
their  unsound  exegesis,  109 ;  pro- 
vided two  doctrines  for  two  different 
sets  of  minds,  184  ;  their  dualism, 
185  -  1S8  ;  their  use  of  Scripture 
proofs,  4S7  ;  their  views  on  the  Re- 
surrection, 576 ;  with  Tertullian's 
criticism  on  them,  ib. 

God,  Clement's  inconsistent  views  of, 
447  ;  man's  relation  to,  454  ;  Origen's 
views  on  His  nature,  492  ;  view  of 
Celsus,  500 ;  Tertullian  attributes  a 
body  to  Him,  577. 

God's  justice  and  love  not  separable, 

454- 

Gordian,  Roman  Emperor,  514. 

Gortynians,  Epistle  of  Dionysius  to,  309. 

Gospels,  the  Four,  apparently  well 
known  to  the  author  of  the  Gospel 
of  Peter,  1 64  ;  certainly  known  to 
Tatian,  351  ;  unicpie  authority  of,  385. 

lost,  152. 

apocryphal,  160- 1 74 ;  of  two  kinds, 

160  ;  first  class — according  to  the 
Hebrews,  160-162;  according  to  the 
Egyptians,  163  ;  according  to  Peter, 
163-169 ;  of  Tatian,  169  ;  of  Marcion, 
169;  of  Basilides,  ib. ;  of  Matthias, 
ib.  ;  of  Andrew,  &.c.,  1 70;  of  the 
Eour  Corners,  ib.  ;  of  Truth,  ib. ;  of 


Perfection,  ib. ;  of  Eve,  ib. ;  of  Philip, 
232  ;  second  class — Gospel  of  James, 
orProtevangelium,  1 70-172  ;  Pseudo- 
Matthew,  or  Gospel  of  the  Infancy  of 
Mary,  172  ;  of  the  Nativity  of  Mary, 
173  ;  of  Thomas,  or  of  the  Infancy, 

173- 
Graces,    the     seven     Christian,     1 14; 

twelve  in  number,  121. 
Groeco-Asiatic    type    of    Christianity, 

418. 
Grffico-Roman  theology,  420. 
Grammar,    included  literary  criticism, 

465   71. 

Greece,  the  trainer  of  man's  intelli- 
gence, 539. 

Greek  intellect,  its  characteristics,  429- 
481. 

Christianity    closely    connected 

with  Greek  philosophy,  541. 

language,  used  over  a  great  part 

of  the  Roman  Empire,  16 ;  the 
spoken  and  literary  language  of  the 
early  Roman  Christians,  36  ;  Shep- 
herd of  Hermas  written  in  it,  lii  ; 
not  disused  till  end  of  second  cen- 
tury, 403  ;  form  of  it  employed  by 
Clement,  441,  442. 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  compared  with 
Origen,  462. 

of    Xeo-Caesarea,    517-523;     a 

pupil  of  Origen,  470  ;  his  account  of 
Origen's  educational  system,  470 ; 
his  names,  Theodorus  and  Thau- 
maturgus,  517  ;  his  biography,  517, 
518;  his  writings,  518-523;  his 
panegyric  on  Origen,  521. 

Grostete,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  78. 

Gymnosophists  of  India  {lihikshus), 
supposed  source  of  Encratite  teach- 
ing, 414. 

Hadrian,  rescript  of,  273  ?i.,  294;  visit 
to  Athens,  292  ;  initiated  into  the 
mysteries,  293. 

Ham,  prophecy  of,  204. 

Hanmer,  Dr.,  a  translator  of  Euscbius, 
422. 

Harmonius,  son  of  Bardesanes,  229. 

Harnack,  references  to,  41,  52,  417. 

Harris,  Mr.  Rendel,  291. 


I 

I 


INDEX. 


Hatch,  Dr.,  261. 

Heathen  thinkers  illuminated  by  the 
Logos,  334. 

Hebdomad  of  Basilides,  201. 

Hebraic  period  of  Church  literature, 
84. 

Hebrew  language,  mostly  unknown  to 
the  Fathers,  260  n.,  334  v.  ;  known 
to  Melito,  367  ;  to  Origen,  473. 

Hebrew  Scriptures,  their  pre-eminent 
authority  recognised  by  Origen,  483. 

Hebrews,  Epistle  to,  II  ;  its  influence 
on  the  writer  to  Diognetus,  304  ;  its 
teaching  on  Creation,  313  ;  its  in- 
fluence on  Justin,  329. 

Hebrews,  Gospel  according  to,  160-162  ; 
used  by  Hegesippus,  357. 

Hedone,  a  Valentinian  ceon,  212. 

Hefele,  theory  of  Epistle  of  Barnabas, 
47,  48. 

Hegel,  200  )i. 

Hegesippus,  the  Jewish  Christian  his- 
torian, 352-361  ;  praised  by  Euse- 
bius,  354  ;  was  he  a  Judaiser  ?  355  ; 
fragments  preserved  in  Eusebius, 
356 ;  has  resemblances  to  Irenteus 
and  Tertullian,  357  ;  compared  with 
Africanus,  514. 

Helena,  194. 

Helenians,  195. 

Hellenism,  Tatian's  relation  to,  341. 

Henosis,  a  Valentinian  a^on,  212. 

Heraclas,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  pupil 
of  Origen,  466  ;  his  partner  in  the 
Catechetical  school,  469 ;  succeeds 
him,  474. 

Heracleon,  disciple  of  Valentinus,  220, 

413. 
Heraclitus,    the    supposed    source    of 

Xoetus'  teaching,  414. 
Heresy,  sources  of,   1S2;  classification 

of,  252  ;   modern  forms   of,   253  ;  a 

direct  f)fTspring  of  heathenism,  414  ; 

especially  of  philosophy,  543. 
Heretics,  10. 
]  lermanjinon,  a  correspondent  of  Diony- 

sius,   524  71. 

Hermas,  .Shepherd  of,  1 1 1- 126  ;  (juoted 
as  Scripture  by  Irenaius,  115  n.  ;  and 
by  Pseudo-Cyprian,  127;  rejected 
by  Tertullian   as   apocryphal,    116; 


date  of,  124,  125  ;  his  views  on  mar- 
riage, 115. 

Hermias,  a  satirical  apologist,  300. 

Hermogenes,  a  disciple  of  Marcion, 
240  ;  his  theory  of  Creation,  241. 

Herniophilus,  a  Mcnarchian  teacher, 
244  n. 

Herodes,  the  officer  who  arrested  Poly- 
carp,  96. 

Hexapla,  the,  473 ;  original  copy  in 
Pamphilus'  library,  532. 

Hierapolis,  see  of  Papias,  102. 

Hierarchical  tendencies,  not  favoured 
by  Clement,  446  ;  or  by  Origen,  504. 

Hierax,  a  correspondi-nt  of  Dionysius, 
524  n. 

Hierocles,  governor  of  Bithynia,  a 
writer  against  Christianity,  644. 

Hilary  attests  the  high  reputation  of 
Tertullian's  treatise  on  Prayer  in 
the  fourth  century,  578. 

Hilgenfeld  referred  to,  41. 

Hippo,  the  see  of  S.  Augustine,  548  n. 

Hippolytus,  S.,  on  the  Roman  succes- 
sion, 29  ;  on  the  system  of  Basilides, 
199,  200 ;  Syntagma  or  Compendium, 
199-235  ;  refers  to  Gnostic  exegesis, 
356  ;  supposed  by  Lightfoot  to  be  the 
author  of  the  Muratorian  Fragment, 
406  ;  account  of  his  life  and  works, 
406-416  ;  his  statue,  408 ;  a  hearer  of 
Irenajus,  408-410  ;  an  opponent  of 
Callistus,  ib.  ;  his  Chiliasui,  417. 

Holden's  edition  of  the  Octavius,  616. 

Holiness,  Clement's  conception  of,  450. 

Holland,  Canon  Scott,  on  Justin,  330. 

Homer  held  to  be  inspired,  4S6. 

Horace  referred  to,  413  n.,  507  11., 
546  n. 

Horus,  in  the  system  of  Valentinus, 
212. 

Hyginus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  210-234. 

Hypotyposes  of  Clement,  445-457  ; 
eighth  book  of  Stromateis  probably 
to  be  referred  to  them,  457  ;  another 
work  of  the  same  name  by  Theog- 
nostus,  531. 

Ialdabaoth,  223,  224. 
Idealism  of  Origen,  4S6,  497  ;  of  the 
writer  to  Diognetus,  539. 


67 


INDEX. 


I<1<)1,  true  meaning  of,  4  n. 

Idolatry,  the  root-principle  of  the 
heathen  world,  4  ;  Amobius'  dis- 
cussion of  it,  640. 

Ignatian  Acts,  73, 

Epistles,  genuineness  of,  77-82  ; 

style  of,  84,  85;  value  of,  84,  88,  91. 

Ignatius,  S.,  72-92  ;  derivation  of 
name,  76  ;  incidents  of  his  life  and 
death,  72  -  76  ;  anticipated  the 
speedy  return  of  Christ,  83  ;  empha- 
sises the  Incarnation,  85  ;  and  epis- 
copacy, 86  ;  his  doctrinal  position 
substantially  that  of  the  Nicene 
creed,  88  ;  his  abhorrence  of  heresy, 
89  ;  some  examples  of  his  peculiar 
style,  89,  90  ;  his  pre-eminence  as  a 
man  and  as  a  Church  ruler,  91,  92. 

Ignorance,  the  Great,  of  Basilides,  202. 

Immanence  of  Deity,  a  Stoic  doctrine, 
434-447  n,  ;  as  taught  by  Clement, 

445'  446. 
Incarnation  taught  by  Ignatius,  85  ;  by 

Melito,  362. 
Incest   attributed  to  Christians,  269  ; 

brought  home  to  heathens,  562. 
India,  Christianity  of,  in  time  of  Pan- 

ttcnus,  433. 
Infanticide   attributed    to   Christians, 

proved  of  heathens,  562. 
Inspiration,  Clement's  views  on,  451  ; 

heathen  ideas  about,  485. 
Instruction  given  gi-atis,  430. 
Interpolation    of    Dionysius'    epistles, 

311- 
Irenajus,  S.,  on  the  Roman  succession, 
29 ;  the  first  systematic  Church 
writer,  82  ;  account  of  Polycarp,  94  ; 
on  Tatian,  341  n.,  343  ;  on  the  four 
Gospels,  385  ;  on  the  Church,  ib.  ; 
on  the  Resurrection,  387 ;  on  the 
Millennium,  ib.  ;  on  the  number  of 
the  Beast,  ib.  7J.  ;  on  Eternal  Punish- 
ment, 387  ;  praised  by  Lightfoot, 
3S8  ;  value  for  study  of  the  Canon, 

388  ;  used  the  Syntagma  of  Justin, 

389  ;  Eusebius  appreciates  him,  389  ; 
letters  to  Victor  and  lilastus,  390  ; 
Pfaffian  fragments,  391  ;  his  infhunce 
on  Christian  thought,  392  ;  influence 
of  Roman  Christianity  on  him,  403. 


Isidore,  204,  205. 
Isidorian  Decretals,  44. 
Itinerarium,  a  poetical  work  by  Lac- 
tantius,  646. 

James,  S.,  of  Jerusalem,  2  ;  relation 
of  his  epistle  to  that  of  Barnabas,  62  ; 
to  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  123  ; 
wrong  use  of  his  name  to  discredit 
S.  Paul,  131  ;  false  conception  of 
his  authority,  148  ;  account  of  his 
martyrdom,  by  Hegesippus,  357-359. 

Jerome,  S.,  on  Clement's  letters,  43  ; 
his  biographical  notices  almost 
always  mere  restatements  of  those 
of  Eusebius,  293  ;  on  the  date  of 
Hegesippus,  354  ;  comparis(m  of  him 
and  Origen,  462  ;  his  biographical 
notice  of  Tertullian,  549;  mentions 
a  treatise  attributed  to  Minucius, 
623. 

Jerusalem,  Decrees  of  the  Council  of, 
observed  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Gregory,  520. 

Jews,  their  hostility  to  the  Church, 
97,  257-260  ;  topics  of  controversy 
against,  259,  260. 

John,  S.,  at  Ephesus,  93  ;  his  ideas 
specially  attractive  to  Gnostics,  221  ; 
his  Gospel  the  source  of  the  highest 
apologetic  literature,  278  ;  relation 
of  Justin  to  the  Gospel,  333  ;  Tatian 
acquainted  with  it,  351. 

S.,  later  school  of,  362. 

John  the  Elder,  94 ;  was  he  the  same 
as  John  the  Apostle?  104  n. ;  theory 
of  Dionysius  ou  the  subject,  527. 

of  Damascus,  reputed  author  of 

Barlaam  and  Joasaph,  29071. 

Josephus,  his  narrative  of  S.  James' 
death  differs  from  that  of  Hegesippus, 
361  ;  proves  the  anticjuity  of  Judaism, 

515. 

Judaeo-Christian  perversion  of  Chris- 
tianity, 131-136. 

Judaisers,  131. 

Judaism,  as  explained  by  Barnabas, 
52,  53  ;  antagonistic  to  Christianity, 
25S  ;  Christianity  traced  to  it  genea- 
logically, 513. 

Judas,  Gospel  of,  227. 


INDEX. 


673 


Juliana,  a  Cappadocian  lady,  friend  of 
Origen,  477. 

Julius  Cassianus,  197,  230. 

Justa,  the  Syropha'uiciuM  woman,  140.    I 

Justin     Martyr,     317-337;     perhaps 
visited   Polycarp,   95  ;    his  Dialogue    I 
with  Try pho,   210  :  doctrine   of    the    | 
Holy  Spirit  undeveloped,  251  ;  foun- 
dation   of     his    apologetic    system, 
27S  ;    inconsistent  in   his    proofs    of 
Christianity,    2S4  ;    generous    treat-    | 
nient  of  niythol«)gy,  316  ;  his  date,    I 
318  ;  his  life,  31S-320  ;  martyrdom, 
321  ;  not  a   presbyter,   321  ;    list  of 
spurious  and  doubtful  works,    322  ; 
first     Apology,      323-326  ;     second 
Apology,   326-328;    Dialogue    with 
Tryi)ho,    32S-330  ;    his    relation   to 
Barnabas,  329-335. 

Ju^^tin,  Acts  of  Martyrdom  of,  321. 

Justinus,     a    heretical    teacher,     197, 

413- 
Juvenal,  quotation  from,  342  n.,  636  n. 

Kant,  founder  of  the  critical  philo- 
sophy, 253. 

Keble,  Christian  Year,  38  n. 

Knowledge,  spiritual,  not  merely  intel- 
lectual apprehension,  503. 

Labyrinth,  the,  415. 

"The  Little,"  365,  416. 

Lacedremonians,  Epistle  of  Dionysius 
to,  309. 

Lactantius,  642-651  ;  not  a  consistent 
theologian,  282  ;  probably  of  African 
nationality,  643  ;  purity  of  his  moral 
character,  643,  644 ;  his  relations 
with  Constaiitine,  ib. ;  list  of  his 
works,  644-647  ;  the  Divine  Institu- 
tions, 647-650 ;  literary  excellence 
of  the  work,  651. 

Language,  superstitious  ideas  connected 
with  it,  485. 

Lapsed,  Cyprian's  controversy  with  re- 
ference  to   the  treatment  of   them, 

597. 
Latin  language,  not  at  first  used  by  the 
lioman    Ciiurch,    36  ;    Shepherd    of 
Heimas  translated  into  it  in  second 
century,    III;    generally  spoken  in 


Proconsular  Africa,  550;  its  charac- 
teristics, ib.  ;  adopted  by  Tertullian 
in  preference  to  Greek,  ib. ;  has 
remained  ever  since  the  dialect  of 
theology,  551. 

Latin  version  of  Barnabas,  52. 

Latinity,  of  Tertullian,  552,  576  ;  of 
Ann)bius,  641  ;  of  Lactantius,  643  ; 
of  Commodian,  652. 

Law,  the  Mosaic,  24 ;  its  relation  to 
the  Gospel,  47,  48  ;  view  of  Bar- 
nabas, 51,  52  ;  view  of  Justin,  329  ; 
theory  of  Tertullian,  568. 

Laymen,  privileges  of,  321,  470. 

Lazarus,  convent  of  S.,  289. 

Legends,  rise  of,  352. 

Leouides,  father  of  Origen,  464  ;  his 
martyrdom,  465. 

Leontius  of  Byzantium,  refers  to  Peter's 
treatise  on  the  Divinity  of  Christ, 

531- 
Leptis,    birtliplace    of    Cornutus    and 

Septimius  Severus,  547. 
Leucius    Charinus,     heretical     writer, 

171,  176. 
Liberian  Chronicle,  127. 
Liberius,  his  list  of  Roman  bishops,  29. 
Library  of  Museum,  431 ;  of  Serapeum, 

ib.  ;  of  Origen,  466;  of  Pamphilus, 

Licinius,  defeats  Maxiniian,  646. 

Lightfoot,  Bishop,  references  to,  29  n., 
30  71.,  37,  40  71.,  44,  49,  73,  75,  77, 
79,  80,  88,  95,  99,  103,  104,  105,  109, 
114,  134,  135,  137,  149/1.,  150,  18371.. 
273.  365.  406,  407. 

Linnrcus,  compared  with  Origen,  473. 

Linus,  Bishop  of  Kt>nu',  29. 

Li|»siu8,  on  (inostic  literature,  177. 

Literal  interpretation,  condemned  by 
Clement,  452. 

Literalism  of  Jewish  schools,  487  ;  of 
the  school  of  Antioch,  491. 

Logos,  doctrine  of  the,  1 1,  243  ;  as  held 
by  Paul  of  Samosata,  247  ;  by  Sabel- 
lius,  252  ;  by  Justin,  3^3,  334  ;  by 
Hippolytus,  41S  ;  by  Origen,  491, 
492,  508  ;  by  Tertullian,  562. 

Love,  conception  of,  by  Clement,  450. 

Lucian  of  Antioch,  at  first  a  heretic, 
then  a  Catholic  Christian,  532 ; 
2   U 


674 


INDEX. 


suffered  murtyrdom,  533  ;  fountler  of 

the  Exegftical  school  of  Antioch,  ib. 

Lucius,  a  martyr  ineiitioiied  by  Justin, 

327. 

Luscinius,  a  humanist,  348. 

Lycopolis,  birtliplace  of  Bishop  Alex- 
ander, 533  71. 

Macauia,  a  Valentinian  icon,  212. 

Macarius  Magnes,  mentions  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  Peter,  156. 

Madaura,  547. 

Magic,  Christians  accused  of,  323. 

Mai,  translator  of  a  treatise  of  Gregory 
from  the  Arabic,  519. 

Malcliion,  opposes  Taul  of  Samosata, 
248. 

Mammaja,  mother  of  the  Emperor 
Alexander,  473  ;  sends  for  Origeu  to 
Antioch,  473,  474. 

Manichtcan  prophecies,  204. 

Marcia,  mistress  of  Commodus,  a  Chris- 
tian, 411. 

Marcianus  (or  Marcus),  a  heretic  re- 
ferred to  by  Serapion,  421. 

Marcion,  233-239  ;  his  method  of  New 
Testament  exegesis,  145  ;  his  Gos- 
pel, 169  ;  relations  with  Polycarp, 
98,  235  ;  has  some  points  of  contact 
with  the  African  school,  281  ;  refuted 
by  Irenaius,  3S7  ;  by  Hippolytus, 
413;  by  Tertullian,  571. 

Marcionites  in  the  fourth  century,  235. 

Marcus  the  heretic,  I  lO  n.,  220,  384, 41 5. 

Mark,  S.,  tradition  about  his  Gospel, 
108,  109. 

Marriages,  Hernias'  views  on,  115; 
Tertullian's  views  on,  587,  588  ;  of 
the  clergy,  589. 

Martineau,  his  Unitarianism,  253. 

Martyrdom,  ethical  value  of,  13^  here- 
tical views  on,  203,  221  ;  readiness 
of  Montanists  fr>r,  425  ».;  unsym- 
pathetic attituilo  of  Clement  towards, 
446  ;  Origen's  high  appreciation  of, 
"475^5  71.,  504  ;  Tertullian's  treatise 
on,  579  ;7T!icacy  of,  591  ;  Cyprian's 
praistTTjf,  605. 

"  Martyrdoms"  Collection  of  Ancient." 
by  Kiisebius,  1 00. 

Marty rologies  of  Western  Church  in- 


cluded Clement  of  Alexandria  among 
'        saints,  461. 
Martyrs,  Origen's  exhortation  to,  504  ; 
privileges  generally  accorded  to,  59B 

I       599-  "^ 

M5ry"of  Cassobola,  36. 

S.,  Gospel  of  the  Infancy  of,  172  ; 

Nativity  of,  173  ;  Passing  of,  ib. 

the  (Questions  of,  232. 

Mathematics,  closely  connected  with 
astrology,  140,  413. 

Matter,  Gnostic  conception  of,  189; 
held  by  Encratites  to  be  essentially 
evil,  344 ;  Origen's  remarkable  theory 
as  to  its  nature,  495. 

Matthew,  S.,  Gospel  of,  108  ;  legends 
of,  134  ;  Hebrew  form  of  it  used  in 
India,  433  ;  original  Hebrew  MS. 
supposed  to  be  in  the  library  of 
Pamphilus,  532. 

IMatthew  Arnold,  253  ;  his  definition 
of  God,  261  n. 

Matthias,  traditions  of,  204. 

Maturus,  a  deacon,  394. 

Max  Miiller,  Professor,  209. 

Maximianus,  Roman  Emperor,  perse- 
cutes Christianity,  646. 

Maximilla,  a  prophetess,  421,  422. 

Maximin,  persecutes  the  Christians, 
476,  521.  J 

Maximus,  312,  313  ;  commented  on  the    ■ 
"  Celestial  Hierarchy  "  of  Dionysius,      ■ 
294 ;    his   treatise    on    Matter   bor- 
rowed by  Methodius,  312,  535. 

Bishop  of  Alexandria,  531. 

Meats  and  drinks,  their  influence  on 
the  spiritual  life,  521. 

Melchizedekians,  a  heretical  sect,  244  n. 

Meletius,  Mellitus,  inaccurate  designa- 
tions of  Melito,  367. 

Melitina,the  station  of  the  Thundering 
Legion,  367  n. 

Melito  of  Sardis,  362-367  ;  disciple  of 
Polycarp,  95  ;  speaks  of  a  persecu- 
tion at  Athens  under  Antoninus, 
293  II. ;  list  of  his  works,  363,  364  ; 
wrote  against  Marcion,  365  ;  works 
falsely  ascribed  to  him,  ib.  ;  referred 
to  by  Polycrates,  370. 

Merander,  a  Samaritan   heretic,    195 
disciple  of  Simon  Magus,  384. 


i 


INDEX. 


675 


Messiah,  Valentinus'  doctrine  of,  217, 

218. 
Me.ssiahship  of  Christ,  131. 
Metaphysical  element  in  Christianity, 

II-13. 
Methodius,    533-535 ;     mentions    the 
Apocalypse  of  Peter,  155  ;  his  Ban- 
quet'of  the  Ten  Virgin^,  534  ;  bor- 
rows from  Maximns,  535. 
Metrikos,  a  Valentinian  ieon,  232. 
Michael,  the  glorious  angel,  II9. 
Migiie,  290. 
Military    service,    lawfulness    of,    5S3, 

5S4. 
Millenarian  views  of  Papias,    107  ;  of 

Irenaeus,  3SS  ;  of  Hippolytus,  417. 
Millennium,  doctrine  of,  distasteful  to 
the  Alexandrian  theologians,  524 ; 
to  the  Roman  Church,  ib,  ;  chiefly 
founded  on  the  Revelation  of  S. 
John,  524. 
Miller,  first  published  the  Philosophu- 

menu  of  Hippolytus,  40S. 
Milman's  view  of  the  Clementines,  150. 
Miltiades,  an  Asiatic  churchman,  368. 
INIiiuicius    Felix,    613-623  ;    mentions 
the   sign-marks   of    some    Christian 
sects,    226,    621  ;     his    Octavius    a 
charming     book,     613  ;     contrasted 
with   Tertullian's  Apology,   ib.  ;   his 
date,  614;  his  relation  to  Tertullian, 
ib.  ;  to  Cyprian,  615  ;  his  nati(mality, 
615,  616;  analysis  of  the  Dialogue, 
617-622  ;  defectiveness  of  his  dog- 
matic position,  623. 

Fundanus,    proconsul    of    Asia 

inider  Hadrian,  294. 
Miracles,  proof  from,  2S4  ;   not  denied 
by  Ceisus,   500  n.  ;  nr)t  insisted    on 
much  by  Origen,  502. 
Miraculous  gifts,   becoming  scarce  in 

Origen's  time,  502  )i. 
Mithras,    bread    and    water    used    for 
initiation  into  the  mysteries  of,  325. 
Mixis,  a  Valentini.an  icon,  212. 
Mizraim  -  Zoroaster,  204. 
Modestus,    a  writer  against  Marcion, 

313.  36S. 
Mohammedan  conception  of  the  Divine 

mercy,  2S2. 
Monad,  the  Divine  Essence,  251. 


Monadic  Gnosis,  226. 

Monarchianism,  242  ;  appeared  first  in 
Rome,  243. 

Monarchians  divided  into  I'^bionite  and 
Sabellian,  573. 

Monogenes,  a  Valentinian  oeon,  212. 

Montanism  combated  by  Hermogenes, 
240  ;  by  Praxeas,  249 ;  by  Melito, 
364  ;  referred  to  in  the  Muratorian 
Fragment,  406 ;  its  theory  of  In- 
spiration, 451  ;  has  left  permanent 
effects    upon   the    Catliolic    Church, 

55'"!,  559- 
Montanus,  421  «.,  555  ;  salient  features 
of  his  New  Prophecy,  556. 

Moses,  position  of,  in  Clementine  sys- 
tem, 147. 

supposed  by  Justin  and  Clement 

to  be  the  source  of  the  best  Pagan 
thought,  458. 

Mosheim,  his  estimate  of  Origen's 
character,  462. 

Mosul  =  Nineveh,  346. 

Muratorian  Fragment  on  the  Canon, 
404-406;  it  notices  Hennas,  124; 
the  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  155  ;  it  is 
probably  a  translation,  404  ;  refers 
to  S.  John's  Gospel,  405  ;  probably 
alludes  to  traditions  of  Papias,  405  ; 
hypotheses  as  to  its  authorship,  406, 
407. 

Musanus  or  Musianus,  312. 

Museum  of  Alexandria,  429. 

Musonius  Rufus,  336. 

Mysteries,  the  Heathen,  267, 26S ;  some 
of  their  terms  received  a  Christian 
application,  26S  ;  parallel  between 
their  three  stages  of  initiation  and 
the  system  of  Clement,  456. 

Mystery,  in  what  sense  used  in  New 
Testament,  456  n. 

Mystical  interpretations  of  Old  Testa- 
ment, 4S9,  490. 

Mysticism  in  Clement's  system,  456. 

Mythology,  Clement's  treatment  of,  in 
the  Protrepticus,  457. 

NAAssKNhis,    223  225  ;    njentiontd    by 

Hippolytus,  413. 
Narcissus,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  513. 
Nazarenes,  132. 


676 


INDEX. 


Neunder,  quotation  from,  191,  192, 
209 ;  reference  to  Monarchianism, 
242  71.  ;  referred  to,  274  7i.  ;  in  con- 
nection with  Montanism,  249  71.  ; 
with  Theophilus,  315  ;  in  connt-ction 
with  Tertiilh'an,  567  ;  in  connection 
with  Arnobius,  631,  632  n. 

Neo  -  CfEsarea  in  Pontus,  seat  of 
Gregory's  bishopric,  517. 

Neo-Platonism,  iS,  260  ;  some  peculi- 
arities    of,    263  ;     its     scope,    436, 

437. 
Nepos,  a  Millenarian  teacher,  524  ;  his 

views  controverted  by  Dionysius  the 

Great,  525. 
Nero,   his  death  disbelieved,    50  ;    his 

persecution  of  the  Christians,  272. 
Nerva,  Roman  Emperor,  143. 
New  Testament,  canon  of,  15  ;  relation 

of  Gnosticism  to,  192,  193  ;  Justin's 

relation  to,  336,  337. 
Nicephorus   mentions  the    Apocalypse 

t)f  Peter,  1 56. 
Nicodemus,  Gospel  of,  173. 
Nicolaitans,  227. 
Nicolaus  or  Nicolas,  227. 
Nicomedia,  seat  of  Diocletian's  Eastern 

Empire,  643. 
Nicomedian  Church,  Epistle  to,  309. 
Nicopolis  =  Emmuus,  514. 
Noetus,  a  Monarchian,  249,  250,  413  ; 

Hippolytus'    treatise     aijainst    him, 

417  ;  iiis  views  combated  by  Di(my- 

Sius,    523  71. 

Novatian,  624-629  ;  the  first  to  notice 
the  Sabellian  heresy  by  name,  573  ; 
rigoroiis  in  refusing  readmission  to 
those  who  had  abjured  the  faith, 
600 ;  involved  in  disputes  with 
Cyprian,  606  ;  his  nationality,  624  ; 
peculiarities  of  his  disposition,  625  ; 
gets  himself  consecrated  anti-Pope, 
626;  his  correspondence  witli  Cy- 
prian, 627  ;  summary  of  his  ([ualities, 
628,  629. 

Novatus,  a  presbyter  of  Cartlja<.'e,  one 
of  the  dissentients  at  Cyprian's  elec- 
tion, 594  ;  left  Carthage  and  joined 
Novatian  at  Rome,  600;  his  incon- 
sistency, ib.  n.  ;  his  evil  influence 
upon  Novatian,  62S. 


■    OuEDiENCK    to    the    Bishop    and   the 
I        Church,  Cyprian's  watchword,  596. 
I    Oblias,  a  name  of  James  the  Just,  358. 

Octavius,  title  of  the  Dialogue  by 
I  MinuciuM  Felix,  615  ;  formerly  reck - 
'  oned  as  the  eighth  book  of  Arnobius' 
I        treatise,  623. 

(Ecumenical  Councils  impossible  while 
the  Empire  was  still  heathen, 
601. 

Ogdoad,  of  Basilides,  201. 

Old  Testament,  how  interpreted  by 
Justin,  335  ;  quotations  by  Justin, 
336  ;  Tatian  converted  by  reading 
it,  339- 

Olympus,  seat  of  the  bishopric  of 
Methodius,  according  to  Jerome,  533. 

Ophites,  223  ;  relation  to  Pistis-Sophia, 
232  ;  to  the  Testament  of  Abraham,  ib. 

Optimism,  a  feature  of  primitive  religion 
of  Hellas,  433  ;  a  featiire  of  Clement's 
theology,  453,  459. 

Or  or  Orus,  an  Egyptian  deity  =  Apollo, 
464  n. 

Origen,  Pseudo-,  Dialogue  against  the 
Marcionites,  211. 

Origen,  his  life,  462  -  479  ;  resembles 
Justin  in  his  intellectual  sympathy, 
330  ;  lived  in  a  period  of  transition, 
463  ;  his  birth  and  parentage,  464  ; 
his  friendship  with  Alexander,  465  ; 
his  heroic  c<mduct  in  the  persecution, 
^66  ;  his  austerities,  467  ;  his  rela- 
tions with  Rome,  469,  475 ;  his 
headship  of  the  Catechetical  scho<jl, 
46S-471  ;  leaves  Alexandria,  475  ; 
his  life  at  Ctesarea,  476-47S ;  his 
death,  479  ;  criticism  of  his  system 
and  writings,  4S0-512  ;  list  of  his 
works,  482  H.  ;  his  textual  criticism, 
482-484 ;  theory  of  interpretation, 
484-^91  ;  his  views  about  Gon,  492, 
493  ;  creation  and  the  soul,  494, 
495;  redemptitui,  496-498;  his  work  M 
against  Celsris,  49S-502  ;  his  Soteri-  ^ 
ology,  503-506  ;  his  influence  and 
genius,  507-512. 

Orthodoxy,  defects  in,  of  Justin,  329 ». ; 
of  Clement,  454  ;  of  Origen,  496  ; 
of  Arnobius,  639 ;  of  Lactantius, 
650  ;  true  test  of,   357  ;   «>f  various 


INDEX. 


677 


churches  investigated  by  Hegesippus, 

355- 
Ostia,  scene  of  the  Octavius,  615. 
Otto,  editor  of  Justin,  337. 

r.*:nAGo<::us,  the,  457,  459,  460. 

Pagan  philosophy,  lo. 

Tagan  society,  state  of,  3  ;  Pagan 
belief  in  many  cases  genuine,  264, 
265  ;  often  earnest  in  its  search  for 
truth,  440. 

Pamphilus,  devoted  adherent  of  Origen's 
theology,  513  ;  presbyter  of  Ciesarea, 
531  ;  friend  of  Kusebius,  532  ;  mar- 
tyred under  ])iocletian,  ib.  ;  vindi- 
cates the  memory  of  Origen,  532. 

Panegyric  of  Origen  by  Gregory,  52 1. 

Pantanus,  a  converted  Stoic  philo- 
sopher, first  head  of  the  Alexandrian 
Catechetical  school,  434 ;  visited 
India,  ib. ;  teacher  of  Clement  and 
Origen,  464. 

Pantheism,  16. 

Pantlieistic  tendency  of  certain  Mon- 
archians,  243  ;  of  Noetus,  250. 

Papias,  Bishop  of  Hierapolis,  102-II0; 
his  name,  I02  ;  fellow-disciple  with 
Polycarp  of  S.  John,  103  ;  fragments 
of  his  book,  104,  106,  107,  108  ;  in- 
tention of  the  writer,  109. 

Papirus,  a  martyr,  370. 

Paraclete,  dispensation  of,  according  to 
Montanus,  557. 

Parallel  between  Ante-Xicene  age  and 
our  own,  16,  17  ;  between  Nature 
and  Revelation,  510. 

I'archor  the  prophet,  205. 

Paschal  controversy,  96,  362,  363  ; 
waged  by  Melito,  363  ;  by  Apolli- 
naris,  367  ;  by  Polycrates,  368  ;  a 
treatise  on,  by  Peter  of  Alexandria, 

Passion  of  Christ,  its  imjjortance,  85. 
Pastoral  epistles  show  traces  of  what 

was  afterwards  the  Latin  conception 

of  the  Church,  540. 
I'atara   in   Lycia,    seat   of    Methodius' 

bishopric,  533. 
Patience,  Tertullian's  treatise  on,  590. 
Patrikos,  a  Vahntinian  icon,  212. 
I'atripassian   views,    34,   249   >/.  ;    lan- 


guage which  might  be  mistaken  for, 
365  ;  a  name  applied  by  Tertullian 
to    the   Monarchian   teachers,    572, 

573  "• 

Paul,  S.,  his  doctrine  taught  by  Cle- 
ment, 34  ;  niisai»prehended  by  I5ar- 
nabas,  52  ;  known  to  the  author  of 
the  Didachd,  62  ;  relati(ms  with 
Ignatius,  74  ;  scarcely  known  to 
Hermas,  123  ;  disparaged  in  the 
Clementines,  1 38,  1 48,  1 49  ;  some  of 
iiis  epistles  known  to  Justin,  337  ; 
his  analysis  of  sin  followed  substan- 
tially by  Clement,  449  ;  first  enunci- 
ated what  was  afterwards  the  Greek 
theory  of  the  Church,  540. 

Paul,  Acts  of,  176. 

Paulianist  doctrine,  242  ;  sect,  249. 

Paulus  of  Samosata,  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
246-249. 

Paulus,  a  Gnostic  teacher  at  Alexandria, 
465  ;  Origen's  rehxtions  with  him,  ib. 

Pearson    on   the    Creed,   indebted    for 
!        his  argument  on  the  Resurrection  to 
I        Tertuflian,  576. 
[    Pella,  the  Church  in,  93. 

Pentateuch,  treatment  of,  by  the  Cle- 
j        mentine  writer,  146. 

Peratae,  a  sect  of  heretics,  413. 

Periods  of  Church  literature,  7. 

Peter,  S.,  Acts  of,  176. 

legendary  connection  with  Cle- 
ment, 137-142  ;  works  attributed 
to,  136;  Apocalypse,  155;  Gospel, 
163  ;  Judgment  of,  175  ;  preaching 
of,  ib.  ;  Cyprian's  explanation  of 
Christ's  promise  to  him,  607,  608. 

and  S.   Paul,  jneaching  of,  175  ; 

Acts  of,  176. 

of  Alexandria,  531. 

Petrine  and  Pauline  parties,  33,  135. 

Pliaraoh,  passages  about  him  in  Old 
Testament  as  explained  bv  Origen, 
48S. 

Pharisees,  413  ;  their  connection  with 
the  earliest  form  of  Ebionism,   132. 

Piierecydes,  oracles  of,  204. 

Pliilip  the  Apostle,  referred  to  by  Poly- 
crates, 370. 

Philip  the  Arabian,  Roman  Emperor, 
478  ;  favourable  to  Christianity,  615. 


678 


INDEX. 


rijilip  of  Side,  29S. 

Philippus  of  Gortyna,  312. 

Philo,  II,  258,  311,  s;^;^  ;  his  influence 
on  Alexandrian  Christianity,  430 ; 
his  interpretation  of  Scripture,  486. 

Philoculia  of  Origen,  509  n. 

Phili)meliuni,  Church  of,  99. 

Philosophuniena  of  Hijipulytus,  410  ; 
attributed  to  Origen,  408  ;  to  Caius, 
ib. 

Philosophy,  Greek,  had  a  religious 
side,  231  ;  value  of  it  according  to 
Clement,  458. 

Philumene,  a  supposed  prophetess,  240. 

Ph<cnix,  the,  34. 

Photius,  refers  to  Hegesippus,  355  ;  to 
Apollinaris,  367  ;  to  Hippolytus,  415. 

Phrebonite  Nome,  210. 

Pierius,  a  successor  of  Origen,  531. 

Pinytus,  Bishop  of  Gnossus,  310. 

Pionius  of  Smyrna,  ico. 

Pistis,  a  Valentinian  reon,  212. 

Pibtis-Sophia,  a  Gnostic  work,  231  Ap. 

Pitra,  Cardinal,  published  the  Key  of 
Melito,  364  ;  also  the  Carmen  Apo- 
logeticum  of  Commodian,  652. 

Pius,  Bishop  of  Rome,  124  ;  letter 
attributed  to  him,  127  ;  his  date,  405. 

Pluto,  4  ;  Gorgias,  19  ;  his  influence 
on  Valentinus,  216  ;  the  Attic 
Moses,  261  ;  forms  a  commcm  bond 
of  the  apologists,  284  ;  especiady  of 
the  Alexandrian  Fathers,  285  ;  in- 
fluences Athenagoras,  299  ;  always 
reverenced  by  the  Church,  319  ; 
causes  of  his  influence,  435  ;  mis- 
interpreted by  Xeo-Platonists  and 
Christians,  435  71.  ;  approximates  to 
Christianity,  43O  ;  his  influence  on 
Origen,  486-497. 

Platonism  of  Justin,  319.  330-332. 

Pliny,  210. 

Plutarchus,  an  Alexandrian  martyr, 
406.  . 

poetry,  (Jreek,  not  uninfluenced  by  tlie  1 
Divine  Word,  458.  | 

Polycnrp,  S., 93-101  ;  masterof  Iremeus,  | 
95  ;  Epistle  of,  97,  9S  ;  liis  relations  { 
witii  Marcion,  98  ;  his  testimony  to  j 
the  Ignatian  Kpistles,  99  ;  his  Kpistle  ! 
read  in  the  Cliurch,  98  ;  his  relations   ! 


with  Ignatius,  94,  95  ;  tradition  that 
he  sent  out  evangelists  to  Gaul,  95  ; 
references  to  him  in  Irenaeus,  ^75, 
376. 

Polycarp,  Acts  of  Martyrdom  of,  99, 353. 

Polycrates  of  Ephesus,  36S-373  ;  one 
of  the  school  of  S.  John,  95,  362  ; 
his  use  of  the  title  /zaKciptos  (of  blessed 
memory),  525  n. 

Pontianus,  banished  to  Sardinia  by 
Maximin,  407. 

Ponticus,  400. 

Pontius,  a  Carthaginian  deacon,  bio- 
grapher of  Cyprian,  594  ;  lived  on 
intimate  terms  with  him,  612. 

Pontus,  Epistle  of  Dionysius  to  the 
Churches  of,  309. 

Popular  religious  literature,  353. 

Porphyry,  opponent  of  Christianity, 
263  ;  a  fellow-student  with  Origen, 
468  ;  his  criticism  on  Origen's  theo- 
logical method,  ib.  ;  refuted  by 
Methodius,  Eusebius,  and  Apolli- 
naris, 534. 

Portus,  seat  of  Hippolytus'  bishopric, 
407-409. 

Post-baptismal  sin,  544  ;  not  remissible 
by  the  Church,  557. 

Pothinus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  398. 

Praxeas,  a  Mcmarchian,  249  ;  Tertul- 
lian's  treatise  against  him,  572,  573. 

Presbyters,  not  mentioned  in  the 
Didache,  61. 

Priesthood  of  believers,  556. 

Primu.s,  Bishop  of  Corinth,  309;  visited 
by  Hegesippus,  355. 

Prisca,  a  Montanist  prophetess,  423. 

Priscus,  father  of  Justin,  317. 

Probation,  human  life  considered  as, 
609  ;  Cyprian's  view  of  it,  as  con- 
trasted with  Augustine's,  6 ID. 

Proclus,  a  Montanist  teacher,  416. 

Propiietic  writings  in  early  Church, 
100,   no  )l. 

Prophets,  in  the  Church,  61,  69. 

Protrepticus,  the,  44;;,  457-459. 

Pru«lentius,  on  S.  Hippolytus,  407. 

Psychics  or  Psychical  Christians,  a 
term  applied  by  Tertullian  to  the 
Orthodox,  591. 

Psychology  of  S.  Paul,  4S8. 


INDEX. 


679 


Ptolemaeus,  n  hfi-ftic,  221  ;  his  influence 
ill  CJaul,  377  ;  nicntioni-il  by  Hippo, 
lytus,  413. 

Ptolemy,  336. 

Publius,  an  early  bishnp  of  Alliens  and 
martyr,  293. 

Punishment,  IreniL'us  on  eternal,  389  ; 
always  remedial  accDrding  to  Origen, 
505.  506. 

Pupianus,  a  correspondent  of  Cyprian, 
596  n. 

Pythigoras,  supposed  source  of  Mar- 
cus' theories,  414. 

Pythagoreans,  applied  to  by  Justin, 
319  ;  menti<nied  by  Hippolytus,  413. 

Ql-AI>UATUS,  Athenian  apologist,  292- 
294  ;  possibly  the  same  as  (^uadiatus 
the  bishop,  293. 

Quarto- Deciman  usage,  363,  369. 

Qiiintilla,  an  anti-baptismal  sectary,  574. 

Quotations  of  classical  authors  in  Cle- 
ment's writings,  458. 

Rational  natures,  Origen's  theory  of, 

494- 

Rebaptism  of  heretics  and  schismatics, 
600. 

Redemption,  in  Valentinus'  system, 
215;  according  to  Clement,  455; 
according  to  Origen,  496  srjq. 

"Reign  of  Law,"  5,  n. 

Relation  between  man  and  (lod,  the 
determining  factor  in  religious  posi- 
tion, 278,  279. 

Religions,  science  of,  19,  209,  253  ; 
characteristics  of  Greek,  433  ;  recon- 
ciliation of  with  philosophy,  465. 

Relij,'ious  reaction  in  the  ancient  world, 
2t)6,  267. 

Remarriage,  Tertullian  on,  58S  ;  of 
priests,  589. 

Renan  referred  to,  2S9,  373. 

Rentlall,  52. 

Resurrection  of  tlie  body,  according  to 
Athen:igoras,299;  according  to  Iren- 
JBUs,  386  ;  modern  arguinent.H  against 
Christ's  resurrection  anticipated  by 
Celsus,  501  «. 

Rho<la,  Koman  lady,  mistress  of  Her- 
mas,  1 1 2. 


Rhodon,  421,  422  ;  an  opponent  of 
Apelles,  240. 

Robinson,  Mr.  Armitage,  164,  290. 

Roman  Church,  succession  of  bishops 
in,  29  ;  early  government  of,  31,  32  ; 
distinctive  character  of,  32,  418  ; 
generosity  of,  310  ;  Epistle  from,  3 1 1  ; 
authority  of,  385  ;  assumption  of, 
402  ;  used  Greek  language  until 
time  of  Victor,  403  ;  its  clergy  un- 
sympathetic towards  Origen  and 
Jerome,  469  ;  condemns  Origen,  475  ; 
contains  the  fullest  apostolic  teach- 
ing, 590. 

Rtunan  Christianity  connected  with 
Roman  Imperialism,  541  ;  its  spirit- 
ual theory  framed  by  the  great 
African  Fathers,  542. 

Law,  analogies  from,  in  Tertul- 
lian, 542  ;  in  Lactantius,  649. 

Routh,  Rdiqnid  Sacra',  I  lo ;  on  a 
fragment  of  Papias,  353  n.  ;  on 
Hegesippns,  355  ».,  357  71.,  35S  n.  ; 
on  the  Gnuco-Asiatic  theologians, 
421   H. 

Rutinus  on  the  Roman  succession,  29  ; 
(m  the  second  Epistle  of  Clement,  40  ; 
translated  the  Kpistle  to  James,  44  ; 
the  Clementine  Recognitions,  137, 
150. 

Rusticus,  Prefect  of  Rome,  31S. 

Sabkli.iamsm,  242,  573. 

Sabellius,  251,  252  ;  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria writes  against  him,  529. 

Sacrifices  (human)  attributed  to  Chris- 
tians, but  brought  home  to  heathens, 
^  562. 

Sadducees,  a  Jewish  sect.  413. 

Sagaris,  a  Latxlicean  maityr,  369. 

Sakya  Mouni,  7,  290  ». 

Salmon  on  the  date  of  liermnj», 
125  ;  on  Dionysius  of  Corinth,  311, 

,  31 -• 

Salt  Lake  City,  424  n. 
Salvius  tlulianus,  the  legist,  547. 
Sanctus,  a  Viennese  d«  .aeon,  394. 
Sanday,  Professor,  referred  to,  3S6. 
Sardinian  mines,  n<»toriou.sly  unhealthy. 
409. 
I    Satan,     iwsition     of,     in      ^*aKl^tinus' 


68o 


INDEX. 


eysteni,  215  ;  in  that  of  Bardesanes, 
230. 

Satornilus,  same  as  the  following. 

Saturninus,  a  Docetic  teacher,  197  ; 
according  to  Irenaeus,  a  disciple  of 
Simon,  384. 

Scepticism  of  ancient  statesmen,  265  ii. 

Schaff  on  the  Greek  of  the  Didache, 
62  ;  on  S.  Hippolytus,  406,  407. 

Schism,  an  evil  pci'  sc,  607. 

Science,  ancient  and  modern,  contrasted, 
6  ;  science  of  religions,  209,  253. 

Sciences,  course  of  them  taught  by 
Origen,  culminating  in  theology,  471. 

Scripture,  argument  from,  not  em- 
ployed with  heathen  opponents,  331  ; 
authority  of,  in  Origen's  system,  471  ; 
simple  character  of  the  sacred  writ- 
ings, 502  ;  not  to  be  placed  in  the 
hands  of  heretics,  570. 

Sebastion,  the,  429. 

Secundus,  a  Valentinian  teacher,  re- 
futed by  Ireniinis,  384. 

Seneca,  26 1  ;  alluded  to  by  Xovatian, 
627. 

Serapeum  in  Alexandria,  429. 

Serapion,  420,  421  ;  his  judgment  on 
the  Gospel  of  Peter,  1 63,  1 64. 

Serenus  Granius  accepts  Quadratus' 
Apology,  294. 

Seth     discovers    the    Oil    of    Comfort, 

179- 

Sethites,  227,  413. 

Severa  or  Severina,  415. 

Severians,  an  Encratite  sect,  ^Sy. 

Severus,  Roman  Em])eror,  persecution 
under,  440,  465. 

Sextus,  a  village  near  Carthage,  61 2. 

Sibyl,  the,  113. 

Sibylline  Oracles,  1 57- 1 59  ;  quoted  by 
several  Fathers,  160  ;  used  by  Tlieo- 
philus,  314  ;  by  Clement,  441. 

Sicca  in  Numidia,  residence  of  Arno- 
bius,  631  ;  where  Lactantius  may 
have  been  his  pupil,  643. 

Simon  the  Cyrenian,  crucified  instead 
of  Jesus,  206. 

Simon  Magus,  1(4,  195;  in  the  Cle- 
mentines, 138;  theory  that  he  is 
intended  to  represent  S.  I'uul,  1 48, 
149  ;  said  to  l»e  worshipped  at  Home, 


336 ;    controverted   by    Hippolytus, 

413. 

Sinjonians,  195. 

Sinope,  the  birthplace  of  Marcion,  234. 

Smyrna,  Letter  of  the  Church  of,  91, 
99-101. 

Socrates,  death  of,  265,  321  ;  his  reli- 
gious consciousness,  434. 

Sophia,  one  of  the  Valentinian  icons,  2 1 5. 

Sortes  Apostolorum,  175. 

Soter,  Bishop  of  Rome,  32;  Epistle 
from  the  Roman  Church  under  him 
addressed  to  the  Corinthian  Church, 

3"- 
Soul,  C^rigen's  theory  of  its  nature  and 
destiny,  ^.^;;  ;  Tertullian  attributes  a 
body  to,  577  ;  his  address  to  the  soul, 
566  ;  Arnobius'  theory  on  the  soul, 

639- 
South,  Bishop,  compared  with  Clement, 

441. 
Spectaculis,      de,      Tertullian 's      trea- 


tise, 
5S2. 


58 1  ;    an    extract    from,    581, 


Spirit,  Holy,  spoken  of  as  Christ's 
Mother,  161  n.,  229  ;  not  alluded  to 
by  the  writer  to  Diognetus,  305  ; 
Origen's  views  on,  493  ;  not  men- 
tioned by  Arnobius,  623  ;  double 
procession  of  Holy  Spirit  already 
hinted  at  by  Novatian,  62S. 

Spirit  and   matter,    relation    between, 

575- 

Spiritual  Church,  the,  556;  spiritual 
natures,  according  to  the  Gnostics, 
184,  214. 

State,  heretical  views  on  the,  222. 

Stauros,  the  heavenly  prototyjw  of  the 
Cross,  213. 

Stephanus  Henricus,  300. 

Stephen,  Bishop  of  Rome,  310  ;  corre- 
sponds with  Dionysius,  524  n.  ;  his 
decrees  resisted  by  the  African 
bish«)ps,  54S  ;  duel  betwetii  him  and 
Cyprian  on  the  question  of  heretical 
baptism,  601. 

Stoic  pliilosopliy,  434,  435  ;  followed 
by  Hermogenes,  241  ;  influenced  the 
views  of  heretics  on  the  Person  of 
Clirist,  247  ;  much  studied  by  Cle- 
ment,   433,   441  ;    its  theory  of  the 


INDEX. 


68i 


iiniuaiieiicf'  (>f  l)eity,  539;  its  influ- 
ence on  Tt'itullian,  579  ;  its  doctrine 
of  Xoyo^,  562. 

Strasburg,  the  conflagration  in,  303. 

Stroinatcis  of  Clenunt,  443,  456,  460. 

Suicide  consiciered  a  virtue,  3. 

Supernatural  lieligion,  author  of,  109. 

Susanna,  Origen's  correspondence  with 
Africanus  on  History  of,  4S4,  516. 

Symeon,  son  of  Clopas,  Bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  360. 

Syinniachus,  translator  of  the  Old 
Testament,  473. 

Sympathy  with  those  who  differ,  a  rare 
quality  among  dogmatic  writers,  330, 

33^- 

Symposium  of  Plato,  imitated  by  the 
Clementine  writer,  150;  by  Metho- 
dius, 534. 

Syncellus,  5 1 5. 

Synesis,  a  Valentinian  ;eon,  212. 

Synods  of  African  bishops  and  clergy 
convened  by  Cyprian,  602. 

Syriac  documents,  the  Clementine 
Epistles  on  Virginity,  43  ;  the  Dia- 
tessaron  of  Tatian,  351  ;  the  works 
of  Bardesanes,  228 ;  the  commen- 
taries of  Ephraem  and  Aphraates, 
346  ;  Apology  of  Melito,  363  ;  frag- 
ment on  the  double  nature  of  Christ, 

365. 
Syriac    language,    known     to    Tatian, 

351  ;  to  Melito,  364. 
Syzygy  ((Jnostic),   133  ;  in  the  sN'stem 

of  Valentinus,  21 1. 

Tacitus  alluded  to,  636  ». 

Tagaste,  birthplace  of  S.  Augustine, 
548  H. 

Tatian,  33S-351  ;  came  under  the  in- 
fluence of  .lusiin,  321,  338  ;  Oration 
to  Creeks,  340,  341  :  Irena-us  on 
his  unorthodoxy,  338  ».,  341  ;  the 
1  )iates«aron,  344-351  ;  his  tables  of 
Scripture  pn)ble>ns,  420. 

Taylor,  Bishop  .Jeremy,  may  be  com- 
pared with  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
441. 

TertuUian,  criticised  Mtlito  in  his  dc 
Ecsta 3 i,  ^66  ;  compared  with  Origi-n, 
462,  512  ;  his  life,  546-559  ;  personal 


characteristics,  549  ;  date  of  conver- 
6i<m,  ib.  ;  well  read  in  Greek,  550  ; 
comparative  priority  of  him  and 
Minucius,  550  n.  ;  temper  of  his 
mind  recalls  Tatian,  551  ;  his  style, 
552  ;  his  sincerity,  553  ;  his  ortho- 
doxy on  fundamental  points,  554 ; 
some  deviations  from  the  Catholic 
standard,  ib.  ;  becomes  a  Montanist, 
555  ;  adopts  an  exclusive  tone,  557  ; 
has  secured  recognition  for  several  of 
his  principles,  558,  559  ;  criticism  of 
his  works,  560-592  ;  apologetic  trea- 
tises, 560-569 ;  controversial  writing-", 
569-574;  dogmatictreatises,  574-578 ; 
moral  and  practical  works,  579-592  ; 
his  psychology,  577  ;  shows  deeper 
appreciation  of  revealed  religion  than 
the  Alexandrian  divines,  567,  568  ; 
injustice  towards  his  opponents,  572. 

Tertullian's  appeal  to  the  emperoi-s  to 
tolerate  Christianity,  273,  276. 

Tertullianists,  a  sect,  592. 

Testament  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Chiist, 

157. 
Testaments  oi  the  Twelve  Patriarchs, 

132. 
Tetrad,  the,  a  Gnostic  work,  226. 
Textual  criticism  of  Scriptures  founded 

by  Origen,  483. 
Thales,  432. 
Thascius,  original  name  of  S.  Cyprian, 

593- 
Thaumaturgus,    surname    tif    Gregory, 

517. 
Thebuthis  357. 
Thecla,  Acts  of  Paul  and,  179. 
Theism,  16. 

Theletos,  a  Valentinian  ieon,  212. 
Themis<»n,  a  Montanist  prophet,  422. 
Theoctistus,    P>ishop  of  Csesarea,  47 1  ; 

friend   and    patmn  of    Origen,    472, 

474  ;  ordains  Origen,  474. 
Theoiloret,  liishop  of  Cyrrlnis,  348. 
Theodorus  =;  (iregoiy     Tiiaumaturijus, 

517-523- 

Theodo^ius,  l'>i>hop  <'f  Tyana,  509  ;j. 

TI»e(Klotion,  translat  »r  of  the  OUl  Testa- 
ment, 473. 

Theodotus  tlie  elder,  a  Monarchian, 
243  ;  the  Notjnger,  244  h. 


68: 


INDEX. 


Theoi,'no.stu.s  of  Alexandria,  5;, I. 
Theolofjical  character  of  the  entire  lite- 

ratin-e  of  the  Ante-Nicene  age,  I,  2. 
Theolo<;y,  according  to  Irenteus,  386. 
Theonas,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  531. 
Theoj)Iiilus  of   Antioch,   3 13-3 1 6  ;   his 

treatment  of  mythology,  316. 
Theoi)horas,   a  name  of   Ignatius,    77, 

464  n. 
Theophylact,  ascribes  a    fragment    to 

P-ipi«s,  353. 
Theosophy,  183. 
Theiidades,  supposed  teacher  of  Valen- 

tinus,  210. 
Thomas,  Gospel  of,  173. 
Thraseas    of     Eumenia,     a    martyred 

bisliop,  370. 
Thundering  Legion,  story  of,  367,  36S. 
Timseus  oi  Plato,  214,  266. 
Timotheus  of  Alexandria,  43. 
Toleration  not  unknown  to  the  Romans, 

271. 
Tradition,  immen.se  value  attached  to, 

in    early    Cinirch,     286 ;    authority 

claimed  for  it  by  Tertullian,  5S3. 
Traducianism,  a  theory  of  Tertullian, 

578. 
Trajan,  rescript  of,  272,  561. 
Transmigration    of    souls,    taught    by 

Noetus,  250. 
Trent,  Council  of,  rejects  the  "  Shep- 
herd," 127. 
Trinity,  doctrine  of,  12  ;  in  Cleinent's 

Epistle,  34  ;  according  to  Sabellius, 

251  ;  according  to  Athenagoras,  299  ; 

to  the  writer  to  Diognetus,  304  ;  to 

Irenicus,  386  ;  Origen's  theory,  492- 

494  ;  statement  of  the  doctrine  by  S. 

Gregory,   519,  520;  Tertullian  held 

it  firmly,    574  ;    Novatian's  treatise 

on,  627. 
Trypho,  anEphesian  Jew,  259;  Justin's 

Dialogue  with,  320,  32S-330. 
Tubingen  school,  views  (»f,  356. 
Two  Ways,  referred  to  by  Lactantin?, 

650. 
Tyre,  the  place  of  Origen's  deatii,  479  ; 

legends    of     him    still    current,    ib.  ; 

birthi)lace  of  Pamphilus,  532;  see  of 

Methodius,    acconling     to     Jerome. 

532. 


Union,  Hypostatic,  496. 

Unitarian  Systems,  242-254  ;  how  they 

arose,  243. 
Unity,    the    Divine,    attested    by   the 

common  consciimsness  of  men,  567  ; 

Paganism  tending   to   recognise    it, 

567  ;  proved  by  Minucitis,  622. 
Unity  of  the  Church,  conception  of  it 

by  Ignatius,  87  ;    by  Cvprian,  606- 

608. 
Universalism,   taught  by  Origen.  505, 

506. 
Urban,  Bishop  of  Rome,  contemporary 

with  Minucius,  615. 
Urbicus,  Prefect  of  Rome,  322. 
Usages,    some   peculiar    ones    of    the 

African  Church,  578. 
Ussher,  Archbishop,  78. 

Valkntinian  writers,  220-222. 

Valentinians,  Eastern  and  Western, 
21S-229. 

Valentinus,  208-220  ;  not  alluded  to 
in  the  Ignatian  letters,  81,  89  ;  his 
system  not  a  philosophy  of  religion, 
209  ;  his  date,  210  ;  system,  21 1-219. 

Varro  alluded  to  by  Arnobius,  640. 

Verissimus,    son    of    Antoninus    Pius, 

323- 

Verus  associated  with  M.  Aurelius  in 
the  government,  368. 

Vespasian,  an  anecdote  of,  622  n. 

Vestal  virgins,  the,  620. 

Vettius  Epagathus,  a  Viennese  Chris- 
tian, 393. 

Victor,  Bishop  of  Rome,  249  n.  ;  took 
a  decisive  part  in  the  Paschal  con- 
troversy, 368,  369  ;  his  episcopate 
marks  an  epoch,  403  ;  his  relations 
with  Callistus,  411  ;  writings  attri- 
buted to  him,   419  ;   his  character, 

430- 

Bishop  of  Capua;  345,  346. 

Victorinus  of  Petavium,  653. 

Virgil  quoted,  326. 

Virgil's  representation  of  the  manner  in 

which  deity  manifests  itself,  497  ti. 
Voss,  discoverer  of  Ignatius,  yj,  78. 

Ways.  The  Two,  51,  58. 

Westcott,  on  Pseudo-Clement's    date. 


INDEX. 


683 


43  ;   on  the  date  of  the  Shepherd, 
117;  on  the  Muratorian  Fragment, 

405- 
Women,  position  of,  under  the  Empire, 
17;   in  Carthage,  5S4  ;   Tertnllian's 
addresses  to,  5 84- 5 86. 

XEROPH.\(;iit:,  557. 

Xystus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  96. 

ZACCHiEUS,    legendary  bishop  of   Cics- 
area,  139. 


Zahn,  on  Ignatius,  79  ;  on  a  passage  of 
Hernias,  120  7i.  ;  on  the  date  of  Her- 
nias, 125  ;  his  services  in  recovering 
Tatian's  Diatessarun,  345,  348. 

Zenobia,  246,  248. 

Zephyrinus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  245  ;  in- 
fected with  Unitarian  views,  250 ; 
received  Origen  at  Rome,  468. 

Zoe,  a  Valentinian  aion,  212. 

Zoology,  Tatian's  treatise  on,  339. 

Zoticus,  a  writer  against  the  Mon- 
tanists,  421. 


INDEX  TO  GREEK  WORDS. 


ay^vrjTos,  88  n. 

a.-ytfl'TJTOS,  88  71. 

dy€U}/ji.^Tpr)Tos,  184  n.  331. 
'Ai'af^X,  1 10  n. 
a.KivriTO%,  90  n. 
d/ii-rjTOL,  26S. 
dua^ad/xoi,  1 38  n. 
dva^aTLKbv,  160  n. 
d»'TtXe76/xei'a,  57. 
d.6pyr]Tos,  90  ?i. 
diroKaOapais,  456. 
dpaSLOvpyrjTO^,  37 1  ?i. 
dpi'i'eti',  371  n. 
dpxai  of  Origen,  475. 

a/>X^,  493- 
airre^oi/fl-iOJ',  449  71. 
avTodeos,  493. 

76^77x6$  yeui'rjTds,  88  7i. 
7i'dj(rts,  183. 

Sat'yuo^es,  267. 
dij/xiovpyds,  493. 
StOacTK-aXeroi',  409  7J. 
oi'vapiLS  and  ev^pyeia,  200  7i. 

iyKparus,  iyKpaTrjTai,  343  71. 
etSwXoj',  4  71. 
(Kir^raais,  7 1  7i. 
tudp(TOi,  90  71. 
^I'l'ota,  194  212. 
cv<TihfxaTo%  364. 

t^T^TJfftS,     104. 

tTriOi'fjLrjTiKdf,  t6,  488  7i. 

(TTOTTTfla,    456. 

tpu)J,  90. 
ti'd»'(?a5,  389  «. 
ci'VOi'XOj,  362  ;/.,  371   n. 


deSs,  6  Beds,  493. 
dufMoeid^s,  t6,  488  71. 

ldiu)/j.a,  492  71. 
'It/ctoOs  and  idofiai,  334  7i. 
tx^i^s  =  'l7;(roOs  Xptaros  9eoO  Ttoj  Zwr^p, 
574- 

/ca^apot  ^Novatian's  sect,  626. 

KOLvds,    306  71. 

Xaretfoj,  389  n. 
\6yia,  104. 
Xo7i(rTtK6»',  TO,  488  71. 
X670S  <nrepp.aTLK6s,  333. 

/xaKapios,  311  71. 
fieyaXTj  dTr6<pa(XLS,  194. 
/xf/xinffx^DOL,  26S. 
fMOuapxia,  573  7j. 
MiV'S,  456. 
fivarrjpioy,  26S. 

^tAToXaos,  227  7?. 
;'6^a,  57. 
t'ofs,  206. 

OLKOvo/xia,  303. 
OMoXoyoi'/xfi'a,  57* 
6/tooi'crtas,  24S  7i.  493  7i. 
dpOodo^acrral,  452. 
oi'S^c  (paifd/Kvov  Ka\6i>,  90  7i. 

OlVoIS'  fiTTWJ,   345   71. 
6<pi6fX0p<p0S,    224  71. 

TT^raXoi',  371  71. 
iro/)a0i  dy,  50  u. 
TTC/rfpaafi^poi',  rb,  494  7i. 
■n-Xi^piv/jLa,  211. 
iri'f  I'/ua,  48S  n. 


684 


INDEX  TO  GREEK  WORDS. 


685 


Tpec^iia,  299  7J. 
Tpo^oXri,  211. 
irpo(X(pvr)S  '/'I'X''?.  205  7t. 
irTvpofxai,  371  71. 

aiyrj,  212. 

CkCj^IS,   300  71. 

(TTavpbs,  21S. 

(TTOtXCra,    362    71.,    371    71. 

(7i;i'iry/at,  211. 

(rvWoyiff/jioi  of  Apelles,  240. 
ffuXriv,  21S. 
aufjia,  488  7<. 


Tfirdi',  389  /». 
TcXer^,  268. 

<pi\6'C\os,  90  77. 

<pu)TL(jp.b%  (=/3a7rTi<r/i6s),  268,  497. 

Xaptr,  212. 
XpiffTLayifffJids,  91  '^^ 

\p€v5eirlypa(pa  46  71. 
\pvxVt  217,  488  71. 

u-'O?),  a  hymn,  406  7i.,  417  n. 


INDEX  TO  LATIN  WORDS, 


AccEiTA,  used  by  Ignatius,  90. 
.'Eon,  211. 
Apocryphus,  46  n. 

Arguiiienttim    ad   hominem,    used    by 
Tertullian,  562. 

Bythos,  211. 

Cathkdka,  117,  408. 

Deposita,  used  by  Ignatius,  90. 
Desertor,  used  by  Ignatius,  90. 
Dispositio  {  =  olKovoiJ.ia),  295  n. 
Duae  Viae,  51  71. 
Ducenarius,  246. 

ELKMENTA  =  (TTOtXf'"a,  362  11. 

Episcopus,  inn. 

Exemplarium,  used  by  Ignatius,  90. 

Exomologesis,  591. 

GuAViTAS,  643. 

Houus,  213. 

Idiomata,  493. 


Judicium  Petri,  51  n. 

LiBERUM  arbitrium,  449  n. 
Literae  humaniores,  431. 

Media  qualitas,  640. 

Nauclerus,  234. 
Nuntius  =  angelus,  iii  «. 

Pneumatici,  190. 
Praesides  Ecclesife,  in  n. 
Proprium,  492  n. 
Psychici,  190,  557. 

Regula  fidei,  543. 
Religiones  licitae,  271. 

SaRMENTICII,  564  71. 
Seuiaxii,  564  n. 
Sodalitates,  274. 
Spiritales,  557. 
Static,  117,  557. 
Snbintroductfe,  54S  n. 
Subsellia,  II 6,  124. 

Testimonium  (authentication),  136  7j. 


PRINTED    BV    BALLANTVKE,    HANSON,   AND   CO. 
EDINBURGH    AND   LONDON 


New  Issue  of  this  important  Work-Enlarged,  in  part  Re-written, 
and  thoroughly  Revised  to  date. 

Twenty-Eighth  Edition,     lloyal  Svo,  handsome  clot/i^  lox,  6'/. 

A  DICTIONAKY   OF 

Domestic  Medicine  and  Household  Surgery, 

BY 

SPENCER  THOMSON,  M.D.,  Edin.,  L.R.C.S. 

REVISED,  AND  IN  PART  RE-WRITTEN,  BY  THE  AUTHOR, 
AND   1?Y 

JonX  CHARLES  STEELE,  :\LD., 

Latk  ok  Gi  v's  HosriTAL. 

With  Appendix  on  the  Management  of  the  Sick-room,  and  many- 
Hints  for  the  Diet  and  Comfort  of  Invalids. 


In  its  New  Form.  Dr.  Spencer  Thomson's  "Dictionary  of  Domestic  I^Iedicine" 
fullv  sustains  its  reputation  as  the  "Representative  Book  of  the  Medical  Knowledge 
and*  I'ractice  of  the  Day"  applied  to  Domestic  Requirements. 

The  most  recent  Improvements  in  the  Treatment  ok  the  Sick— in  Appliances  for 
tlie  Rfiike  of  PAiN-and  in  all  matters  connected  with  Sanitation,  Hygiene,  and  the 
M\iNTF\\NCE  of  tlie  General  Health— will  be  found  in  the  New  Issue  in  clear  .and 
full  detail  ;  the  experience  of  the  Editors  in  the  Spheres  of  Private  Practice  and  of 
Hosi)ital  Treatment  respectively,  combining  to  render  the  Dictionary  perhaps  tlie  most 
thoroughly  practical  work  of  the  kind  in  the  English  Language.  Many  new  Engravings 
liave  b.-en  introduced— improved  Diagrams  of  different  parts  of  the  Human  hotly,  and 
Illustrations  of  the  newest  Medical,  Surgical,  and  Sanitary  Ai)paratus. 

*  *  All  Directions  nivcn  in  such  a  form  rt.v  to  be  readily  and  safely  folloircd. 


FROM  THE  AUTHOR'S  PREFATORY  ADDRESS. 

"Without  entering  upon  that  difficult  ground  whicli  correct  professional  knowledgo  and 
educated  judgment  can  aLno  ,.erniit  to  be  safely  trodden,  there  is  a  wi.le  and  extensive  field 
for  exertion,  and  for  usefulness,  open  to  the  unprofessional  '»  ;^;?^^Vln?n''?IMf^^n^•  n"/ 
DOMESTIC  MF.DICINK,  the  timely  help  and  solace  of  a  "Vc'I xmt  v  hv  i>im^^^^ 
better  still,  in  the  watchful  care  more  generally  known  as  SAM  1  AliY  rHLLAUTlON  which 
tends  rather  to  preserve  health  than  to  euro  disease.  'The  touch  of  a  gentle  hand  will  not  bo 
less  Kcntlc  because  guided  by  knowle.lge,  nor  will  the  mjc  .lomestic  remedies  be  les.s  anxiously 
or  carefully  administered.  Life  may  be  s-aved,  sufferintr  may  •^ways  be  alleviated.  Even  to  the 
icsident  in  the  midst  of  civilisation,  the  '  KNOWLEDGE  IS  POWER  to  do  good  ;  to  the  settler 
and  emigrant  it  is  INVALUABLE." 


«'  Dr.  Thon.son  has  fully  succeeded  in  conveying  to  the  public  a  vjist  amount  of  useful  pro- 

fcs.sional  knowledge."— />«Wuiyow?-jiafo/3/c</ica/5drtic«.  ,,..„,•,  a-  j 

"The  amount  of  useful  knowledge  .conveyed  in  this  Work  is  surprising.  —Medical  Times  and 

"  Worth  rrs  wkioht  in  fiOLO  to  familiks  and  the  clkkoy."— Ox/ord  Herald. 


LONDON:   CHAiiLK.S  (IRIFFIN  &  CO.,  Ltd.,  K.xeteu  Street,  Strand. 


FIRST  SERIES— THIRTY-FIFTH  EDITION.     SECOND  SERIES— NINTH  EDITION. 

MANY  THOUGHTS  OF  MANY  MINDS: 

A  Treasury  of  Reference,  consisting  of  Selections  from  the  Writings  of  the  most 

Celebrated  Authors.  FIRST  AND  SECOND  SERIES.  Compiled  and  Analytically  Arranged 

By  HENRY  SOUTHGATE. 


In  Sfjiiarc  Svo,  clcfjantly  printed  on  toned  pnprr. 

Presentation  Edition.  Cloth  and  Gold  12  6  each  volume. 

Library  Edition,  Half  Bound,  Roxburghe    .         .         14/- 

Do.,  Morocco  Antique        .         .         .         21/-  ,, 

IaicIl  l<cricA  is  complete  in  itself,  and  sold  scparatcli/. 


"  '  Many  Tmought.s,"  <tc.,  are  evidently  the  produce  of  years  of  resenrdt."—  Examiner. 

"  Many  beautiful  examples  of  thought  and  style  are  to  be  found  among  the  selections." — 
LfcKl'  r. 

"  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  is  destined  to  take  a  high  place  among  books  of  this  class." 
—  Sotes  and  Queries. 

"  A  treasure  to  every  reader  who  may  be  fortun.ite  enough  to  possess  it.  Its  perusal  is  like 
inlialing  essences  ;  we  have  the  cream  <»nly  of  the  great  autliors  quoted.  Here  all  are  seeds  or 
geins." — English  Journal  of  Bducntinn. 

"  Mr.  Southgate's  reading  will  be  found  to  extend  over  nearly  the  whole  known  field  of 
literature,  ancient  and  modern." — Geiitliniaa's  Magazine. 

"  We  have  no  hesitation  in  pronouncing  it  one  of  the  most  import-mt  books  of  the  .season. 
Credit  is  due  to  tiie  publishers  for  the  elegance  with  which  the  work  is  got  up,  and  for  the 
extreme  beauty  and  correctness  of  the  typography."— ^/ornuicr  Chronicle. 

"Uf  the  ntuneruus  volumes  ol  tlie  kind,  we  do  not  remember  having  met  with  one  in  which 
the  selection  was  more  judicious,  or  the  accumulation  ol  treasures  so  truly  wonderfuL" — Morning 
Herald. 

"The  selection  of  the  extracts  has  been  made  with  taste,  judgment,  and  critical  nicety." — 
Morning  Povt. 

"  This  is  a  wondrous  book,  and  contains  a  great  many  gems  of  thought."— Dfi/.v  .AV;c*. 

"  .\s  a  work  of  reference,  it  will  be  an  acquisition  to  any  man's  libraiy." — Publishers'  Circular. 

"This  volume  contains  more  gems  of  thought,  refined  sentiments,  noble  axioms,  and  extract- 
able  sentences,  tiian  have  ever  before  been  brought  together  in  our  language." — The  Field. 

"  All  that  the  poet  h;is  described  of  the  beauiiful  in  nature  and  art,  all  the  axioms  of  experi- 
ence, the  collected  wisdom  of  philosoplier  and  sage,  are  garnered  into  one  heap  of  useful  and 
well-arranged  instruction  and  amusement." — The  Era. 

"The  collection  will  prove  a  mine,  rich  .and  inexhaustible,  to  those  in  search  of  a  quotation." 
— Art  Jnurval. 

"  Will  be  found  to  be  worth  its  weight  in  gold  by  literary  men."— The  Builder. 

"  Every  page  is  laden  with  the  wealth  of  profoundest  thought,  and  all  aglow  with  the  loftiest 
inspirations  of  genius." — Star. 

"The  Work  of  Mr.  fiimthgate  far  otitstrips  .all  others  of  its  kind.  To  the  clergyman,  the 
author,  the  artist,  and  the  essjiyist,  *  .Many  Thoughts  of  Many  Minds'  cannot  fail  to  render  .almost 
incalculable  service." — Edinburgh  Mircuri/. 

"  We  have  no  hesitation  whatever  \n  describing  Mr.  Sotithgate's  as  the  very  best  book  of  the 
cluss.  There  is  positively  nothing  of  the  kind  in  the  language  that  will  be.ar  a  moment's  com- 
parison with  it." — Manchester  Weekly  Advertiser. 

"There  is  no  mood  in  whicli  we  cm  take  it  up  without  doiiving  from  it  instruction,  con- 
solation, and  amusement.  We  heartily  tliank  Mr.  Southgate  for  a,  book  which  we  shall  regard 
OS  one  of  our  best  friends  and  comjjanions."  -Cambridge  Chronicle. 

"This  work  po.s.se.sses  the  mciitof  l)eing  a  maonikicent  c;irr-«ooK,  appropriate  to  all  times 
and  seasons;  a  book  calctilatetl  to  be  of  u»e  to  the  scholar,  the  divine,  and  the  public  man." — 
Freemason's  Magazi ne. 

"  It  is  not  so  njuch  a  lx)ok  .as  a  library  of  quotations." — Patriot. 

"Tlie  quotations  abound  in  that  thought  which  is  the  mainspring  of  mental  exercise." — 
Liverpool  Courier. 

"  For  i)urpoHe8  of  apposite  quot.ation,  it  cannot  be  s\\rpA8Hcd."—liristol  Timet. 

"  It  is  imiKKSsible  to  pick  out  a  single  pas.sago  in  the  work  which  does  not,  up<in  the  face  of 
it,  justify  its  selection  by  its  intrinsic  merit." — Dorset  Chronicle. 

"We  are  not  Huri)riHed  that  a  Skcond  Seiiiks  of  this  work  should  have  been  called  for.  Mr. 
Houthgato  h.as  the  catholic  tastes  dcsira))le  in  a  good  editor.  Preachers  and  public  »iH'akcrs  will 
find  that  it  has  special  uses  for  them."—  Edinburgh  Daily  Review. 

"  The  Sk(<jnd  Sekif:s  fully  sustains  the  deserved  reputation  of  the  Fin.sT."— /oAn  Bull. 


LONDON  :  CHARLES  GRIFFIN  &  CO.,  Ltd.,  Exeter  Street,  Strand. 


m 


1    1012  01124  8939 


